THE STATE Versus MST. GHULAM KHATOON

MANZUOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J.- Mst. Ghulam Khatoon, aged 24/25, daughter of Abdullah, was tried by the Sessions Judge, Jhelum, under section 302, P. P. C, for causing the murder of Mst. Amir Begum. The learned trial Judge vide his judgment dated 24-4-1973, acquitted the accused.

The order of acquittal, however, was challenged .by the State and Nehmat Khan complainant through Criminal Appeal No. 662 of 1973 and- Criminal Revision No. 912 of 1973, respectively. We propose to dispose of both these matters by this judgment.

2. The facts of prosecution case, as disclosed in the statement of Nehmat Khan P. W. 7, are as follows:

On 10th June 1972, at Rotiwela, Nehmat Khan, Muhammad Ashraf P. Ws. and one Sarwar were grazing sheep and goats near a Kassi known as Dalani Shahni in Chak Malook, at a distance of six miles from Police Station,

4. Chakwal, District Jehlum. Mst. Amir Begum deceased came to the Kassi for washing clothes. She was followed by the accused who had come there to offer water to the buffalo. She was carrying a moongli. Immediately after her arrival, she began to abuse Mst. Amir Begum and started giving her blows with the moongli. The complainant on seeing this reached the spot and found Mst. Amir Begum lying senseless. It is stated that the accused threw the moongli there and escaped. Mst. Amir Begum was brought to her house where she succumbed to the injuries soon after her arrival.

The motive was that Haq Nawaz husband of the deceased was an Army employee. He developed illicit relations with the accused. The latter wanted to marry him and remove the deceased from her way,

3. First information report (Exh. P. A.) was recorded by Ghulam Sarwar, S. H. O. Police Station, Chakwal at 2-00 p.m. on the same day. He reached the spot at 4-00 p.m., prepared the injury statement Exh. P. C., inquest report Exh. P. D. and . despatched the dead body to mortuary Chakwal for post-mortem under the escort of Noor Muhammad F. C. (P. W. 2). The complainant produced moongli P. 1 before the Investigating Officer. The same was taken into possession vide memo. Exh. P. B. He arrested the accused on 11-6-1972.

4. Dr. Asghar Hamid Qureshi conducted post-mortem examination, and found on the dead body, a lacerated wound on the left mastoid bone behind the ear with fracture underneath the injury and two contusion wounds on the head causing fracture of bone. He opined that these three injuries were ante-mortem and sufficient to cause death individually or collectively. Death according to the doctor occurred due to bleeding into the left cerebral hemisphere.

5. The accused denied the charge against her and, pleaded innocence. She attributed her involvement in the case due to enmity and produced no defence, except copy of statement Exh. D. F. of Ghulam Muhammad sop. of Ahmad Khan.

6. We have gone through the evidence and heard the learned counsel for the State and the respondent.

7. The prosecution case mainly rests on the ocular evidence of Nehmat Khan '(P. W. 7), Muhammad Ashraf (P. W. 8) and Ghulam Ghaus (P. W. 9), motive, recovery of the weapon of offence and the medical evidence.

7. The trial Judge disbelieved the ocular evidence, rejected the motive and also recovery evidence. The evidence of Nehmat Khan P. W. was discarded on the ground that he was closely related to the deceased and contradicted with the statements of other witnesses on material points.

Muhammad Ashraf P. W. was disbelieved on account of enmity while Ghulam Ghaus's evidence was discarded as his, presence on the scene of occurrence was not established and also that his statement did not inspire confidence.

We find no reason to differ with the findings of the trial Court and hold that the ocular evidence was rightly rejected.

Nehmat Khan P. W. is admittedly maternal-uncle of the deceased. He did not mention in the F. I. R. Ghulam Ghaus P. W. to be present at the scene of occurrence. He made supplementary statement to include his name in the set of eye-witnesses but it appears from the statement of Ghulam Ghaus P. W. that it was an improvement made by Nehmat Khan.

Muhammad Ashraf P. W. although did not admit that he was inimical to the family of the accused, but it is established that Ghulam Muhammad son of Ahmad Khan had appeared against him as a witness in a theft case. Ghulam Muhammad is admittedly son-in-law of Mst. Bholi, the sister of the father of the accused.

There are also other discrepancies in his statement which render his testimony not fit for reliance.

Ghulam Ghaus P. W. did not admit that Mst. Bholi was sister of the accused's father, although he had admitted the same before the Committing Magistrate. After close examination of his statement, we find that his statement is also not reliable to justify order of conviction. There is no corroboration available to the ocular evidence in this case. The production of moongli by the complainant himself before the Investigating Officer and it being not stained with blood, was rightly rejected by the trial Court.

The solitary evidence of Allah Yar P. W. 5, who is paternal uncle of the deceased, cannot prove motive against the accused. Even otherwise, mere proof of motive itself is not sufficient to warrant conviction of the accused, in the absence of reliable ocular evidence. In any case, having discarded c the ocular evidence, the evidence of motive and recovery, the medical evidence is of no significance.

8. The upshot of the above discussion is that there is no merit in this appeal and the revision which are dismissed.

Appeal and revision dismissed.