NAZIR AHMAD Versus STATE
Nazir Ahmad aged 50 years, Abdul Hamid aged 20 years, Gul Muhammad aged 17 years and Aslam aged 15 years were tried, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur for the murder of Gul Muhammad deceased and murderous assault on P.W.8 Ghulam Haider. Vide the impugned judgment, dated 3-11-1987 the appellants were convicted and sentenced under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. to undergo imprisonment for life each with a fine of Rs. 5,000 each, in default whereof to suffer further R.I. for 2 years each. Under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. the appellants were directed to pay Rs.5,000 each as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased, and in default thereof to suffer 6 months' S.I. each. They were also convicted and sentenced under section 307/34 to undergo 10 years' R.I. each with a fine of Rs.2,000 each, in default whereof to suffer one year R.I. each. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellants have come up in appeal to assail their conviction and sentence.
2. Appellant Nazir Ahmad has since died and proceedings against him are abated. Death certificate issued by the Neuro Surgeon, B.V. Hospital, Bahawalpur has been produced.
3. P.W.7 Ghulam Rasool on 13-3-1987 at 11.30 a.m. lodged F.I.R. Exh. P.O. at Police Station Sadar, Bahawalpur recorded by P.W.11 Zameer Khan, Inspector to the effect that he was working as a fireman on the brick-kiln of Haji Allah Bachaya and on the death of his maternal-granduncle Elahi Bakhsh, his mother Mst. Kundan Mai had filed a suit and got one Bigha of land from the inheritance. She transferred the land in the name of the complainant and his four brothers and they had grown mango trees on the land. The brothers of mother of the complainant wanted that the land should be restored to them, but the complainant's father had not agreed. On the day of occurrence at Peharvela, day time, Gul Muhammad deceased-father of the complainant was wedding the mango plants. The complainant P.W.7 Ghulam Rasool alongwith his brother P.W.8 Ghulam Haider left the house for going to the brick-kiln and from the other side of the street Muhammad Nawaz Shah, P.W. (given up) also reached. Meanwhile appellant Nazir Ahmad (since dead) and Hameed appellant armed with hatchets, Gul Muhammad appellant armed with a knife and Aslam appellant armed with Soti reached and raised Lalkara to Gul Muhammad, father of the complainant that he should not weed in the land as they would take back the possession for ever and assaulted him. Nazir Ahmad and Hameed appellant inflicted hatchet blows on the head of father of the complainant, Aslam appellant caused Soti blows on his head and Gul Muhammad appellant caused injuries with the knife on his chest, who fell down. Thereafter, Aslam appellant inflicted Soti blows on the right shoulder and arm of Gul Muhammad deceased, P.W.8 Ghulam Haider reached running to save his father, but the accused also gave injuries on his head, arm and legs whereupon he fell down. On hue and cry, the accused after arrival of the residents of the village escaped. Gul Muhammad, father of the complainant, succumbed to his injuries at the spot and leaving behind Ghulam Sarwar (P.W.9) and Ghulam Farid P.W. (given up), his brothers, the complainant reached the police station and lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. The appellants were challaned and sent up for trial. Charge under sections 302/34 and 307/34, P.P.C. was framed against them, to which they denied and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution examined 10 P.Ws. in ail to substantiate its case. P.W.1 Muhammad Hussain, Revenue Patwari had prepared site plans Exhs.PA. and PA/1 on the pointation of P.Ws. and direction of the police. P.W.2 Muhammad Nawaz received two parcels of hatchets, one parcel of knife, one parcel of blood-stained earth and other sealed bottles from P.W3 Abdul Sattar M.H.C. and delivered the same in the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore intact. P.W3 Abdul Sattar, H.C. had received sealed parcels lying in Malkhana when he took over charge on 14-4-1987 from Naib-Moharrir of the police station. On 21-4-1987 he sent the same to the respective office through P.W.2 Muhammad Nawaz. P.W.4 Muhammad Rafiq, Constable escorted the dead body of the deceased to the mortuary and after autopsy on 14-3-1987 the Doctor handed over two sealed envelopes and 7 sealed bottles which he delivered to P.W.11 Zamir Khan, Inspector. He also delivered last-worn clothes of the deceased Chaddar P.1 and Kurta P.2 to P.W.11 which he secured vide recovery memo. Exh.P.B. and the bottles etc. were also taken into possession by him vide recovery memo. Exh.P.C. attested by P.W.4. P.W.5 Ghulam Hussain joined the investigation and in his presence, the S.H.O. secured blood-stained earth vide memo. Exh.P.D. After about 5/6 days Nazir Ahmad, appellant (since dead) while in police custody led to the recovery o1 blood-stained hatchet P3 from his residential Kotha which was made into a sealed parcel and secured vide memo. Exh.P.E. On the same day, Hameed appellant while in police custody led to the recovery of blood?stained hatchet P.4 from his Chapper which was made into a sealed parcel and was secured vide memo. Exh.P.F. Gul Muhammad appellant on the same day while in police custody led to the recovery of blood-stained knife P.5 from his house lying underneath the box, which was made into a sealed parcel and secured vide memo. Exh.P.G. On the same day, Aslam appellant while in police custody led to the recovery of Sota P.6 from his Chapper which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.H. P.W.5 attested memos Exhs.P.D., P.E., P.F., P.G. and P.H.
5. P.W.6 Dr. Khalid Majeed on 14-3-1987 at 11-00 a.m. conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased Gul Muhamamd and found the following injuries:---
(1) ??????? An incised wound measuring 1.5 x 0.5 c.m. with fracture of skull bone under it, on right parietal region of scalp vertically.
(2) ??????? A lacerated rounded wound measuring 1.5 x 1.25 c.m. with fracture of skull bone under it. On rigWt parietal region of scalp just lateral to injury No.l.
(3) ??????? An incised horizontal wound on right parito occipital region of scalp measuring 5 x 1.00 c.m. with fracture of skull bone under it.
(4) ??????? Any occihymosed area 1.00 c.m from right eye with conjection and sub-conjectival haematoma.
(5) ??????? Clotted blood in both nostral of nose was present. There was no blood in both ears. There was also no blood in mouth. There was no mark of violence on limbs, right forearm was blood-stained.
(6) ??????? An incised veritcal wound on an interior aspect of right chest as mid clavicular region in between first and second ribs of right side, measuring 1.5 x 0.5 c.m. On exploration pleura was ruptured.
(7) ??????? Bruise measuring 1.00 x 7.5 c.m. on posterio superior aspect of right shoulder.
In the opinion of the Doctor, most probable cause of death was due to head injury due to fracture of skull and sub-dural. Haematoma caused by injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. Injury No.6 acted as precipitating factor. These injuries were sufficient to cause death of a man in the ordinary course of life. However, to confirm the opinion and to rule out anything else the specimens were sent to Hisptopathologist and Chemical Examiner, and final opinion was to be given after the receipt of report and result. Injuries Nos. 1, 3 and 6 were caused with sharp-edged weapon, while injuries Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 7 with blunt weapon. Injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 were grievous in nature while the remaining were simple. The probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was within half an hour, and between death and post-mortem was from 24 to 48 hours.
On 13-3-1987 at 5-00 p.m. P.W.6 also medically examined Ghulam Haider (P.W.8) and found the following injuries on his person:---
(1) ??????? An incised wound vertical in mid-parietal region of skull measuring 6.00 x 1.00 x 0.75 c.m. Patient was conscious and X-ray of skull was advised. He was admitted in Surgical Ward-1.
(2) ??????? An incised vertical wound on left perito occipital region of skull measuring 6.50 x 1.0 x bone deep. This injury was kept under observation.
(3) ??????? An incised wound on right parieto-occipital region of skull measuring 4.00 c.m. x 0.75 x bone deep. Injury kept under observation.
(4) ??????? A lacerated wound measuring 1.00 x 0.25 c.m. on the hip of little finger of right hand with laceration on tip of index finger of right hand. Patient complained of pain. X-ray was advised for right hand.
(5) ??????? A contusion on posterio medical aspect or right forearm measuring 8.00 x 4.00 x 15 c.m. and X-ray advised for right forearm.
(6) ??????? Multiple lacerations with complain of paid of right elbow joint and X? ray was advised
(7) ??????? Multiple laceration on posterio aspect of left elblow joint and X-ray advised.
(8) ??????? Multiple laceration on interior and posterio aspect of chest and abdomen. X-ray of chest advised.
(9) ??????? There were oedema on right knee joint. X-ray was advised.
(10) A contused wound measuring 1.00 x. 0.25 c.m. on interior aspect of right lower leg. X-ray advised.
(11) There was oedema on left knee joint and left lower leg. X-ray advised.
(12) The patient complained pain in left ankle joint and advised X-ray of ankle and foot.
In the opinion of the Doctor injuries Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were caused with sharp?edged weapon while the remaining injuries were caused with blunt weapon. After X-ray examination vide Report No.477-487, dated 13-3-1987 sent by Dr. Basharat Ali, Radiologist, B.V. Hospital, Bahawalpur, injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were declared grievous in nature while injuries Nos. 6, 8, 9, 10,11 and 12 were declared simple.
6. P.W.7 Ghulam Rasool is the complainant and eye-witness, who corroborated the contents of the F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. in minute details. P.W.8 Ghulam Haider, is another injured eye-witness who stated that at about 8-00 a.m. on the day of occurrence, he alongwith his brother P.W.7 Ghulam Rasool complainant, were on their way to brick-kiln from their house. When they came out of their house Nazoo Shah P.W. (given up) came from northern side. They went ahead about 2-3 paces when his father Gul Muhammad deceased was weeding under the mango tree. Meanwhile Nazir and Hameed appellants while armed with hatchets, Gul Muhammad appellant armed with knife and Aslam appellant having a Dang came from northern side. Nazir appellant (since dead) raised a Lalkara and said the possession of the land would be their. Meanwhile Ghulam Sarwar (P.W.9)mnd Ghulam Farid P.W. (given up) also reached the spot. Nazir and Hameed appellants inflicted hatchet blows, one each on the head of his father. Aslam appellant inflicted a Dang blow which also landed on his head. Gul Muhammad appellant caused two knife blows on his chest. The father of P.W.8 fell down and Muhammad Aslam appellant inflicted Dang blows on his person. P.W.8 tried to rescue his father and Nazir appellant (since dead) gave hatchet blow on his head. Hameed also inflicted hatchet blow on his head and Gul Muhammad inflicted a knife blow which also landed on his head. Aslam appellant gave Dang blows resulting fracture in his right arm. Aslam appellant also gave Dang blows on the leg and shoulder of P.W.8. On the alarm of P.W.8 the neighbourer also came to the spot and the accused/appellants made good their escape with their respective weapons. Gul Muhammad deceased succumbed to his injuries at the spot. Ghulam Farid P.W. (given up) brought a cot from the house. Ghulam Rasool (P.W.7), Ghulam Farid P.W. (given up) and Ghulam Oadir (not produced) placed the dead body on the cot and took the same in the house of P.W.8. Ghulam Rasool (P.W.7) and Ghulam Haider (P.W.8) left for the police station on a Rickshaw and P.W.7 lodged the F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. P.W.8 was medically examined in the hospital and his statement was recorded there. P.W.8 further stated that his mother Mst. Kundan inherited one Bigha of land after the death of his maternal-grandfather, which was mutated in their name in Ayub Regime. The accused had snatched its possession twice and then the complainant party got possession of the land through warrant of possession issued by the competent Court.
7. P.W.9 Ghulam Sarwar, another eye-witness supported the prosecution case and also corroborated the statements of P.W.7 and P.W.8. P.W.10 Dr. Basharat Ali on 13-3-1987 after examination of 11 films of X-ray of various parts of body of P.W.8 Ghulam Haider observed as under:---
X-ray of skull
(1) ??????? There was seen widening of sagittal sature in the posterior part in
??????????? these skiagrams.
X-ray of right hand and right Forearms.
(2) ??????? There was seen fracture of distal and of right ulna shaft and dislocation of 5th matacarpo-phalangeal joint in these skiagrams.
(3) ??????? There was no X-ray evidence of fracture of the bones of right elbow, left knee-joint, left ankle goint, right knee joint and right lower leg seen in these skiagrams.
(4) ??????? There was no X-ray evidence of fracture of the lower six ribs on either side seen in this skiagram.
8. P.W.11 Zameer Khan, Inspector had recorded the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. on the statement of P.W.9, prepared injury statement Exh P.M. of P.W.8, who had accompanied P.W.7 and sent him for medical examination. He proceeded to the spot, secured the dead body of the deceased vide memo. Exh.P.D. He prepared the inquest report Exh.P.K. and injury statement Exh.P.L. of the deceased and sent the dead body for autopsy. He collected blood-stained earth from the place of occurrence vide memo. Exh.P.D., made it into a scaled parcel. On 14-3-1987 after post-mortem examination Muhammad Rafiique, Constable (P.W.4) produced before him last-worn clothes of the deceased Chaddar P.1 and Kurta P.2 which were secured vide memo. Exh.P.B. P.W.11 recorded the statements of P.Ws., got prepared site plan Exh.PA. and its duplicate copy Exh.PA./1 from Muhammad Huss" Patwari (P.W.1). On his application Exh.P.O. the Doctor had opined that Ghulam Haider injured was fit to make statement. Then he handed over the investigation to P.W.12 Ahmad Din, S.I./S.H.O. After arrest of the accused and after investigation he had challaned the accused. He had deposited sealed parcels with the Moharrir. P.W.12 Ahmad Din, S.I. was entrusted with the investigation by P.W.11 and on 18-3-1987 Nazir Ahmad appellant (since dead) led to the recovery of blood-stained hatchet P3 from his residential Kotha which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.G. Hameed accused led to the recovery of blood-stained hatchet P.4 from his residential Kotha, which was secured by P.W.12 vide memo. Exh.P.F. On the same day Gul Muhammad led to the recovery of knife PS stained with blood from the residential Kotha, which was secured by him vide memo. Exh.P.G. P.W.12 prepared sealed parcels of P3, P.4 and P.5. On the same day Muhammad Aslam appellant led to the recovery of Sota P.6 from his residential Ihata which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.H. The memos were attested by the P.Ws. P.W.12 had deposited the sealed parcels with the Moharrir and had recorded the statements of P.Ws.
9. The appellants when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution evidence against them and also the recovery of crime weapons at their instance and in answer to the question "Why this case against you?" they had replied that on account of enmity with the P.Ws. who are related to the deceased, were not present at the spot and are made up witnesses, while Ghulam Haider (P.W.8) was unconscious. The appellants neither made statement on oath as envisaged under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produced evidence in defence.
10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. It has been vehemently contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants were in possession of the land in dispute, where the alleged occurrence took place. The motive as alleged by the prosecution has. not been proved on record. The eye-witnesses are closely related to the deceased and the recoveries were effected on the 5th day of arrest of the appellants. The ocular account furnished by the statements of eye-witnesses P.Ws.7, 8 and 9 is not in consonance with the medical evidence. P.W.7 Ghulam Rasool lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. The names of the accused/appellants, the? weapons carried by them, and the manner in which the occurrence took place, all are given in the F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. P.W.7 in the F.I.R. Exh.P.Q. has specifically mentioned that the accused party wanted that the possession of the land mutated in the name of the complainant party be given to them. The motive is that the accused wanted to take forcible possession of the land from the deceased and his sons. P.Ws. have unanimously stated that they were in possession of the land in dispute and at the relevant time the deceased was weeding the mango trees when he was assaulted by the accused and in consonance 'thereof he was given injuries and later on he succumbed at the spot. It has also been stated by P.W.7 that twice illegal possession was taken by the accused party, but the same was restored to the complainant party after the suits were decreed in their favour. There are only verbal suggestions by the defence to the P.Ws. about possession's dispute. But no documentary evidence was produced by the complainant party to establish that they were in possession of the land, where the occurrence took place. The prosecution has established the motive behind the occurrence.
11. P.W.7 complainant (P.W.8) and Ghulam Sarwar (P.W.9) are the sons of the deceased and their statements cannot be relied upon without strong corroboration. P.W. Muhammad Nawaz Shah, eye-witnesses has not been produced by the prosecution as he was won over by the accused/appellant. No doubt the eye-witnesses P.Ws. 7, 8 and 9 are real sons of the deceased, P.W.8 was injured during the occurrence at the hands of the accused party and had received 12 injuries. Three injuries were caused with sharp-edged weapons and the other injuries were with blunt weapon, and later on injuries Nos. 1 to 5 were declared dangerous to life. Presence of the injuries on the person of P.W.8 Ghulam Haider is sufficient to prove his presence at the relevant time. It was also contended that daughter of Elahi Bakhsh was abducted by Ghulam Haider and in the said case he was sentenced to two years' R.I. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and after undergoing the sentence he was released from jail and due to that grievance P.W.8 was given injuries, and during the fight his father was done to death by Elahi Bux etc. The parties are closely related. It is a broad-day murder and substitution is a rare phenomena. The appellants were arrested on 14-3-1987. Nazir Ahmad appellant (since died) on 18-3-1987 led to the recovery of blood-stained hatchet P.3, secured by P.W.12 vide memo. Exh.P.G. On the same day Hameed appellant got recovered blood?stained hatchet P.4 secured vide memo. Exh.P.F. Gul Muhammad appellant also led to the recovery of blood-stained knife P.5 secured vide memo. Exh.P.G. Aslam appellant led to the recovery of Sota P.6 secured vide memo. Exh.P.H. The recoveries were witnessed by P.W.5 Ghulam Hussain and Noor Muhammad P.W. (given up). Nothing was brought on record that the recoveries had been planted. The reports of the Chemical Examiner and that of the Serologist Exhs.P.X. and P.Y. in respect of P.3, P.4 and P.5 are positive. Ghulam Haider (P.W.8) received injuried with sharp-edged and blunt weapons as is evident from the M.L.R. Exh.P.M.
12. The medical evidence furnished on record by the statements of P.W.6 and P.W.10 is in consonance with the ocular account furnished by the statements of P.W.7,.P.W.8 and P.W.9. The statements made by P.Ws. 7 to 9 cannot be thrown away or brushed aside on account of their close relationship i.e. being sons of the deceased. Their testimony is in consonance with the medical evidence furnished on record as well as is corroborated by the recoveries of incriminating weapons of offence at the instance of the appellants.
13. The motive as alleged by the prosecution has been established. The ocular account is in consonance with the medical evidence. The recoveries of weapons of offence at the instance of the appellants stand proved. The A prosecution witnesses have no motive whatsoever to falsely involve the appellants in this case. They have made statements in a straighforward manner and an implicit reliance can be made on their testimony.
14. Pursuant to the above discussion; I am of the considered view that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case beyond any shadow of doubt g against the appellants. Resultantly the appeal filed by the appellants fails end is dismissed. The appellants are present on bail, who shall be taken into custody and sent to jail to serve their sentence. They shall be extended the concession of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
N.H.Q./N-182/L ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.