MUHAMMAD ALI Versus STATE

Muhammad Ali aged 40 years, Khurshid Ahmad aged 35 years, appellants alongwith Ghulam Haider aged 60 years (acquitted accused and Muhammad Akram and Muhammad Ashraf, absconding accused were sent up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur for the murder of Ahmad Ali deceased and murderous assault on P.Ws. Jan Muhammad (P.W.7), Sher Muhammad (P.W.8), Mst. Mehran (P.W.9) and Mst. Amna (P.W.10) and one Nazar Muhammad who was not produced. The learned trial Court vide its impugned judgment, dated 25-2-1991 had acquitted Ghulam Haider and convicted and sentenced Muhammad Ali and Khurshid Ahmad appellants under section 302/34, P.P.C. to undergo imprisonment for life each with a. fine of Rs.10,000 each, in default whereof to suffer further one year's R.I. each. They were also directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000 each under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, in default whereof to undergo further 6 months' R.I. each. They were also convicted and sentenced under section 307/34, P.P.C. on three counts to undergo 3 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000 each, and in default of payment of fine, each of them was ordered to suffer 6 months' R.I. on three counts. Each of them was further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2,000 on three counts, in default whereof to suffer further 6 months' R.I. on each count. The fine, if realized, was directed to be paid to the injured P.Ws. Jan Muhammad, Nazar Muhammad and Sher Muhammad. The substantive sentences of imprisonment under section 307/34, P.P.C. were ordered to run concurrently. Both the appellants were also sentenced under section 323/34, P.P.C. to six months' simple imprisonment on two counts and a fine of Rs.500 each, in default whereof to suffer further 3 months' S.I. each on two counts. Under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. each of them was .directed to pay a compensation of Rs.500 on two counts, in default whereof to undergo further 3 months' S.I. each. The amount of compensation, if realized, was directed to be paid to the injured P.Ws. Mst. Mehran and Mst. Amna. The substantive sentences of imprisonment under section 323/34, P.P.C. were ordered to run concurrently. The benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also awarded to the accused. The appellant have come up in appeal to assail their conviction and sentence: The case against Muhammad Akram and Muhammad Ashraf, co-accused after their absconsion was separated. The connected Criminal Revision No.27 of 1991/BWP for enhancement of sentence of the appellants shall also be decided by this judgment.

2. Briefly the prosecution case is that P.W.7 complainant Jan Muhammad on 3-9-1988 lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.I. at Police Station Head Rajkan, District Bahawalpur at 8-30 a.m. which was recorded by Madad Hussain, S.I./S.H.O. (P.W.16) to the effect that his wife's brother Sher had on lease 20 Acres in the area of Chak No.65/DB from Muhammad Islam (P.W.1) and Muhammad Ikram and in the said area the complainant alongwith Sher Muhammad and Ahmad Ali, deceased brother of Sher Muhammad and Nazar Muhammad P.W. (given up) were cultivating the land, and on the day of occurrence and at about 7-00 a.m. Sher Muhammad (P.W.8), Ahmad Ali deceased and Nazar Muhammad P.W. (given up) were working in their fields when Muhammad Ali and Khurshid Ahmad appellants armed with hatchets alongwith Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) armed with Barchhi, Muhammad Akram and Muhammad Ashraf (absconding accused) armed with hatchets, after making mutual consultation reached there. Muhammad Ali appellant infected hatchet blow on the head of Ahmad Ali deceased and immediately thereafter Khurshid Ahmad appellant caused hatchet blow on the back of head of Ahmad Ali deceased, which landed on the left side of his head. Thereafter, Muhammad Ali etc. started giving injuries to Ahmad Ali deceased, complainant Jan Muhammad, Sher Muhammad (P.W.8) and Nazar Muhammad P.W. (given up). The complainant and others raised hue and cry, on which P.W.9 Mst. Mehran and P.W.10 Mst. Amna, Muhammad Ramzan and Barkat, P.Ws. (given up) reached there and tried to save the deceased and the injured, on which the accused also injured them. Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sharif P.Ws. beseeched the accused, who ran away towards their houses. The motive behind the occurrence was that the accused party after handing over possession of land by Islam and Ikram to the complainant party, wanted to take forcible possession, but the complainant party was not willing and due to said grievance Muhammad Ali etc. accused for killing the complainant party had caused injuries to injured Sher Muhammad, Ahmad Ali, Nazar Muhammad, Jan Muhammad, Mst. Amna and Mst. Mehran. Leaving behind the injured P.Ws. Jan Muhammad (P.W.7) reached the police station and lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.F. Subsequently Ahmad Ali deceased expired after a short while.

3. The appellants alongwith the acquitted co-accused and the absconding accused were sent up for trial. Charges under sections 302/34, 307/34, 148, 149 and 323/34, P.P.C. were framed against the accused, to which they denied and claimed trial.

4. The prosecution examined 18 P.Ws. in all to substantiate its case. P.W.1 Muhammad Islam stated that he alongwith his brother Ikram had leased out 20 acres of land in Chak No.65/DB to Sher Muhammad (P.W.8) for a period of one year (May, 1988 to 1989). At the time of occurrence Sher Muhammad was in possession of the land. P.W.2 Khalid Farooq Constable had escorted the dead body of the deceased Ahmad Ali to the mortuary for post?mortem examination and after autopsy the Medical Officer handed over to him the relevant papers and last-worn clothes of the deceased. P.W.2 produced the same before P.W.16/Investigating Officer who took the same into possession vide memo. Exh.PA. P.W3 Ghulam Muhammad had identified the dead body of deceased Ahmad Ali at the time of autopsy. P.W.4 Ali Muhammad had witnessed the recovery of blood-stained earth secured vide memo. Exh.P.B. and also witnessed the recovery of blood-stained hatchet P.5 at the instance of Khurshid Ahmad appellant which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.C. P.W.5 Muhammad Ramzan witnessed the recovery of blood-stained Barchha P.13 at the instance of Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) secured vide memo. Exh.P.G. He also witnessed the recovery of blood-stained hatchet P.14 at the instance of Muhammad Ali secured by Sh. Madad Hussain (P.W.16) vide memo. Exh.P.H. Both the memos. were attested by him. P.W.6 Muhammad Sadiq also witnessed the recovery of blood-stainted Barchha P.13 at the instance of Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) and blood-stained hatchet P:14 at the instance of Muhammad Ali, appellant secured by P.W.16 Sh. Madad Hussain vide memos. Exhs.P.G. and P.H., respectively. Both the memos. were also attested by him. P.W.7 Jan Muhammad complainant corroborated the F.I.R. P.1 and stated that on the day of occurrence at about 7-00 a.m. Muhammad Ali, Khurshid Ahmad, appellants armed with hatchets, Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Akram (absconding accused) and Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) armed with hatchets and Barchha reached the spot. Muhammad Ali appellant inflicted blow with his hatchet on the right side of head of Ahmad Ali deceased, they ran away. The accused followed them and encircled them at a distance of 2 squares where Mst. Mehran (P.W.9) and Mst. Amna (P.W.10) also ran with them and there Muhammad ALi appellant caused second blow on the head of the deceased. Then Khurshid Ahmad appellant also gave hatchet blow on the head of Ahmad Ali, deceased. Thereafter, the co-accused gave injuries to Sher Muhammad (P.W.8), Ahmad Ali deceased, Nazar Muhammad P.W. (given up), Mst. Mehran (P.W.9) and Mst. Amna (P.W.10). P.Ws. Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sharif (given up) had also reached there who beseeched the accused. The accused ran away.

5. P.W.8 Sher Muhammad, another injured eye-witness corroborated the statement of P.W.7 Jan Muhammad and stated that he alongwith Ahmad Ali deceased, Nazar Muhammad P.W. (given up) and Jan Muhammad complainant (P.W.7) cultivated the leased land and at the time of occurrence, were clearing the cotton crop and were weeding out grass from there. Muhammad Ali, Khurshid Ahmad appellants, Muhammad Ashraf, Mahammad Akram (absconding accused) armed with hatchets and Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) armed with Barchha came there in collaboration with each other. Muhammad Ali appellant gave a hatchet blow on the head of Ahmad Ali deceased and Khurshid Ahmad appellant also extended a hatchet blow on his head. P.W.8 Sher Muhammad alongwith others ran to rescue themselves. All the five accused followed them and at a distance of 2 squares, surrounded them. Muhammad Ali appellant again inflicted a hatchet blow on the head of Ahmad Ali deceased. Then all the five accused gave blows to all the P.Ws. with their respective weapons from their blunt as well as sharp sides. P.W.9 Mst. Mehran corroborated the statements of P.Ws.7 and 8 and had stated that at the time and place of occurrence Muhammad Ali appellant and Khurshid Ahmad appellant, both armed with hatchets, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Akram (absconding accused) armed with hatchets and Ghulam Haider (acquitted co-accused) armed with spear were chasing Ahmad Ali deceased and the P.Ws. who were running ahead. She alongwith P:W.10 Mst. Amna also ran after them. P.Ws. Muhammad Sharif and Muhammad Ramzan (given up) their guests also ran behind them. At a distance of 2 squares the accused surrounded them. Muhammad Ali appellant gave a hatchet blow on the head of Ahmad Ali deceased and he was previously also bleeding from his head. Then Khurshid Ahmad, Muhammad Ali appellants, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Akram (absconding accused) started giving blows with their hatchets and Ghulam Haider (acquitted accused) gave injuries with his spear to Ahmad Ali deceased, Sher Muhammad, Jan Muhammad and Nazar Muhammad, P.Ws. from the right and wrong sides of their weapons. P.Ws.9 and 10 tried to intervene who were also given injuries. P.W.10 Mst. Amna also corroborated the statement of P.W.9. The eye-witness account has been furnished on record by the statements of P.Ws.

6. Medical aspect of the case has been furnished on record by the statements of P.W.11 Dr. Muhammad Sher-uz-Zaman and P.W.18 Dr. Muhammad Javed Akhtar. P.W.11 on 3-9-1988 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Ahmad Ali and found the following injuries on his person:--

(1) ??????? An incised wound 6 x 2 c.m. x bone d eep horizontal in direction above the right eyebrow. The underlying frontal bone was fractured.

(2) ??????? An incised wound 5 x 2 c.m. x bone deep on the left side of front of head. It is oblique in direction.

(3) ??????? An incised wound 4 x 1-1/2 c.m. x bone deep at the top of the mid of head. It is oblique in direction.

(4) ??????? An incised wound 6 x 2 c.m. x bone deep on right side of the head above the right ear.

(5) ??????? There was huge reddish swelling encircling the whole of the lower part of right thigh. Right femour at its lower end.

(6) ??????? There was huge swelling encircling the whole of the lower part of the left thigh. It was also fractured.

(7) ??????? An incised wound 2 x 1 c.m. x bone deep on right leg at its front.

(8) ??????? An incised wound 2 x 1 c.m. x bone deep on left leg at its front.

(9) ??????? An incised wound 1 x 1 x 1 c.m. on outer side of right ankle joint. and had opined that injuries Nos.l, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 were caused by sharp?edged weapons while injuries Nos.5 and 6 were caused by blunt weapons. Injuries Nos.5 and 6 were grievous in nature and injuries Nos.3, 7, 8 and 9 were simple in nature. The cause of death was due to intera cranial haemorrhage and shock. Injuries Nos.l, 2 and 3 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. All these injuries were ante-mortem. The probable time between injuries and death was 15 to 30 minutes and between death and post?mortem examination was 12 to 16 hours. Exh.P.K. is the correct carbon copy of his post-mortem report.

On the same day the same doctor medically examined Jan Muhammad complainant (P.W.7) and found the following injuries on his person:--

(1) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 2 x 2 c.m. x bone deep at the back of the right side of the head.

(2) ??????? A reddish contused swelling 6 x 6 c.m. at the back and top of right shoulder joint.

(3) ??????? A contused swelling 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of the right hand.

(4) ??????? A reddish contused swelling 3 x 2 c.m. at the back of distal part of the left forearm.

(5) ??????? A reddish contused swelling 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of the right leg.

(6) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 2 x 1 c.m. x bone deep mid of left leg.

Injuries Nos.2 and 6 were kept under observation and the rest were simple. Injuries Nos.l and 6 were caused by sharp-edged weapon, while the rest by blunt weapon. Duration of the injuries from the time of his examination was 6 to 8 hours. Exh.P.M. is the copy of his M.L.R. Vide X-ray report, the following result was declared:--

"There was a fracture of right clavicle at its lateral end. Hence injury No.2 is declared grievous in nature. There was also fracture in left' tibia, hence injury No.6 is also declared grievous in nature."

On the same day the same doctor examined Sher Muhammad, injured P.W. and found the following injuries on his person:--

(1) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 3 x 1-1/2 c.m. x bone deep on the front of the left side of head.

(2) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 3 x 2 c.m ~at the back of right side of neck.

(3) ??????? A reddish contused swelling encircling the whole of the right forearm.

(4) ??????? A contused reddish swelling 3 x 3 c.m. on front of right upper arm.

(5) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 2 x 1 x 1 c.m. at the palmer surface of tip of left index finger.

(6) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 3 x 1-1/2 c.m. x bone deep on the front of lower part of right knee joint.

(7) ??????? A reddish contused swelling 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of the left leg.

(8) ??????? A reddish contused swelling 5 x 3 c.m. at the lower part of the front of left side of chest.

Injuries Nos.6 and 8 were kept under observation and rest were simple. Injuries Nos.l, 2, 5 and 6 were caused by sharp weapon, while the rest were by blunt weapon. Vide X-ray report the following result was declared:-

"There i& fracture of the right patella, hence injury No.6 is declared grievous in nature while the rest were declared simple in nature:'

On the same day P.W.11 also examined Nazar Muhammad injured P.W. (given up) and found the following injuries:-

(1) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 3 x 1 x 2 c.m. on left side of head, above left eyebrow.

(2) ??????? A lacerated wound 2 x 1 x 1 c.m. at the back of right forearm.

(3) ??????? A reddish contused 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of left wrist joint.

(4) ??????? A reddish contusion 4 x 4 c.m. on the outer side of mid of left thigh.

All the injuries were simple in nature. Injury No.l was caused by sharp-edged weapon while the rest by blunt weapon.

On 3-9-1988 P.W.11 examined Mst. Mehran Bibi injured P.W. and found three injuries on her person which were simple in nature. Injury No.1 was caused by sharp-edged weapon while the rest by blunt weapon.

On 3-9-1988 P.W.11 also examined Mst. Amna Bibi injured P.W. and found following injuries on her person:--

(1) ??????? An abrasion 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of mid of right forearm.

(2) ??????? An abrasion 2 x 2 c.m. at the back of left leg at its mid.

(3) ??????? A reddish contusion 5 x 5 c.m. on the outer'side of mid of right thigh.

(4) ??????? A reddish contusion 5 x 5 c.m. on the outer side of mid left thigh.

(5) ??????? A reddish contusion 3 x 3 c.m. at the back.

All the injuries were simple in nature and caused by blunt weapon.

On 3-9-1988 P.W.11 Dr. Muhammad Sher-uz-Zaman also medically examined Khurshid Ahmad, appellant and found the following injuries on his person:--

(1) ??????? An incised bleeding wound 6 x 1 x 1 c.m. on the outer side of right upper arm extending from the mid of right upper arm to the outer side of right elbow joint.

(2) ??????? An incised heavily bleeding wound 10 c.m. in length x 2-1/2 c.m. in width and through and through between the palmer and dorsal surfaces of the back of the right hand extending from the mid of the second metacorpal bone to the mid of the inner side of proximal phalanyx of right index finger. The proximal phalanyx and second metacorpal bone were cut in the direction of wound. The underlying tissues were also cut. There was also an incised wound 2 x 1 x 2 c.m. at the palmer surface of proximal part of right middle finger.

Injury No.2 was grievous in nature while injury No.l was simple. Both were caused by sharp-edged weapon.

7. P.W.18 Dr. Muhammad Javed Akhtar on 7-9-1988 X-rayed Jan Muhammad complainant (P.W.7) and vide his X-ray report had found fracture in right clavicle at the lateral end in the X-ray skiagram. He had also found grievous injuries of Sher Muhammad vide Exhs.P.U./1 to P.U./4.

8. The investigation of the case was conducted by P.W.16 Sh. Madad Hussain. The other P.Ws. are of formal nature.

9. The appellants when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution evidence against them. Khurshid Ahmad appellant when examined denied the prosecution evidence and recovery of blood-stained hatchet P.5. In answer to a question ?this case against him and why the P.Ws. have ,cposed against him?" he replied:--

"The case against me and my co-accused is due to enmity and party faction and on incorrect facts. Actually on the day of occurrence Ahmad Ali deceased tried to outrage the modesty of Mst. Maqboolan wife of Akram absconding accused and caught hold of her in the bushes in Chak No.10/DNB. I being empty-handed tried to save her, upon which Ahmad Ali attacked me and caused injuries upon me. Ashraf and Akram absconding accused also tried to save the modesty of Mst. Mqaboolan and my life from Ahmad Ali and others. Jan Muhammad, Nazar Muhammad, Sher Muhammad, Mst. Mehran and Mst. Amna also took part in the fight and were injured. They injured Akram and Ashraf absconding accused as well. Ghulam Haider and Muhammad Ali accused were not present at the place of occurrence:"

The appellants had not made statements on oath as envisaged under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Appellant Khurshid Ahmad produced in defence D.W.1 Mst. Maqsoodan wife of Muhammad Akram (absconding accused) who stated on ;>ath that on the relevant day she went out to ease herself and reached a place where there were bushes and sand dunes when she was taken by surprise and Ahmad Ali deceased caught hold of her and tried to commit sexual intercourse with her. She resisted and raised alarm which attracted Khurshid Ahmad appellant who tried to rescue her from the clutches of Ahmad Ali deceased. Thereafter, the deceased gave hatchet blow on him, which hit him on the upper arm. The deceased again repeated blow and caused injury on the hand of Khurshid Ahmad appellant. On hearing her alarm and that of Khurshid Ahmad appellant, Akram and Ashraf (absconding accused) came there. On hearing the alarm, three male persons and two female from the side of Ahmad Ali deceased also reached there. The three male persons were armed with hatchet and Sotas. They gave blows with their respective weapons on the person of Akram and Ashraf, who in retaliation also inflicted blows to the aforesaid three persons. Had Khurshid Ahmad, Akram and Ashraf not come at the spot on hearing her alarm, Ahmad Ali deceased must have committed rape upon her. She appeared before the police and made statement. The learned trial Court vide its impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the appellants. .

10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants has vehemently urged before me that the prosecution has not come to the Court with clean hands, and has suppressed true facts of the case as well as injuries on the person of appellant Khurshid Ahmad.

11. P:W.7 Jan Muhammad who lodged th e F.I.R. Exh.P.I. at the police station after the occurrence had not stated therein that the decease after receipt of injuries at his head ran and at a distance of two squares he was encircled by the accused party and was again given blows on his head and other parts of his body. P.W.8 Sher Muhammad, P.W.9 Mst. Mehran and P.W.10 Mst. Amna had unanimously stated that the deceased had run to a distance of 2 squares from the place where he was given injuries with hatchets by Muhammad Ali and Khurshid Ahmad and there in Chak No.10, Square No.13, Killa No.21 he was again given injuries by the accused, whereas the fight started in Chak No.65/DB, Killa No.19 of Square No.76 at a distance of two squares. P.Ws.7, 8, 9 and 10 also received injuries during the occurrence and presence of injuries on their person is sufficient to prove their presence at the spot. P.W.7 is sister's husband of the deceased, P.W.8 is brother of the deceased, P.W.9 is the sister of the deceased, whereas P.W.10 is the wife of the deceased. No doubt the injuries on the person of the P.Ws. prove their presence at the spot, but due to their relationship with the deceased-the Court is to be at guard while relying on their testimony. P.W.7 complainant Jan Muhammad made a somersault in his statement before the trial Court while stating that the deceased had received injuries at the hand of Muhammad Ali at first in Chak No.65/DB Killa No.19 Square No.76 and thereafter, to save his life he ran upto a distance of two squares i.e. Chak No.10 Square No.30 Killa No.21 when he was followed by the accused, who overpowered him and gave injuries. Surprisingly no blood was found by P.W.16, Sh. Madad Hussain, I.O. in Chak No.65 Killa No.19 or in between Chak No.65 and Chak No.10 where the deceased's dead body was found by him on his first visit to the place of occurrence. The recovery of incriminating articles i.e. blood-stained hatchet P.5 was believed qua Khurshid Ahmad appellant, whereas blood-stained hatchet P.14 at the instance of Muhammad Ali appellant was not believed. The report of the Chemical Examiner ExhP.V. and that of the Serologist Exh.P.W. pertaining to P.5 is positive.

12. P.W. Dr. Muhammad Sher-uz-Zaman, who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased stated during cross-examination that each injury on the head of the deceased Ahmad Ali would produce shock and reflex action and all the injuries on the head profusely bled. As the head is highly vascular, therefore, the blood would sprout out immediately. After suffering any of the two injuries on his head, Ahmad Ali deceased could not have been able to move as it would be difficult for him to move and for that reason that he had declared injuries Nos.l, 2 and 4 as fatal. P.W.11 also stated that it was incorrect that the injuries Nos.l and 2 cited in Exh.D.C. could be suffered with friendly hand, and it was also incorrect that Khurshid Ahmad appellant suffered these injuries with friendly hand and then got from him this false M.L.R. prepared. P.W.11 has specifically stated that it was not possible for the deceased to move after receipt of injuries on his head, whereas P.Ws./eye-witnesses P.W.7 to P.W.10 have unanimously stated that the, deceased after receipt of head injury ran upto a distance of two squares. The eye-witnesses, also suppressed the injuries on the person of Khurshid Ahmad appellant. D.W.1 Mst. Maqboolan wife of Muhammad Akram, absconding accused categorically stated in the Court that the deceased tried to molest her chastity and wanted to commit rape upon her and on her hue and cry, appellant Khurshid Ahmad reached and was given injuries on arm and palm by the deceased. Thereafter, Muhammad Akram, her husband alongwith his brother Muhammad Ashraf (both absconding accused) also reached and gave injuries to three males and two females from the side of the deceased, whereas they also suffered injuries at the hands of the complainant party. The injuries on the person of Khurshid Ahmad appellant were suppressed by the eye-witnesses.

13. The eye-witnesses made dishonest improvements in their statements before the trial Court and the oral testimony furnished on record by the statements of P.Ws. 7 to 10 is also not in consonance with the medical evidence furnished on record by the statement of P.W.11. The prosecution had not come to the Court with clean hands. Mustajri Najaa Exh.P.J. was produced in the trial Court at the time of recording statement of P.W.8 Sher Muhammad, whereas neither the subscriber Muhammad Islam (P.W.1) was confronted with ,.h.P.J. nor the marginal witnesses of Exh.P.J. were produced in the Court. f.W.1 was the star witness of the Mustajri Nama Exh.P.J., but stated nothing about it before the trial Court. The eye-witnesses though injured are closely related to the deceased and their statements cannot be relied upon unless corroborated by a very strong and independent evidence. The appellants raised specific plea and keeping the same m juxtaposition with that of the prosecution case, the appellants had satisfactorily established the plea raised by them which is also spelt out from the evidence on record and the circumstances appearing in the case. The most important is the statement of D.W.1 who had stated specifically and categorically about her presence at and near the place of occurrence at the relevant time, as well as catching hold of her by the deceased, to molest her chastity and also his attempt to commit rape upon her The accused had produced D.W.1 m support of his plea. There is evidence of D.W.1 on record to show that the occurrence took place in the manner as alleged by him. The plea raised by Khurshid Ahmad appellant is satisfactorily established by the evidence and the circumstances appearing in the case. The statement of the accused fappellants is supported by the statement of Mst. Maqboolan (D.W.1) and also to the effect that she was present near the place of murder of Ahmad Ali deceased.

14. Pursuant to the above discussion, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed and their conviction and sentence is set aside. They shall be released forthwith of not required in any other case. The connected criminal revision has no force and is dismissed.

N.H.Q./M-1184/L ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????? Appeal allowed.