GHULAM MUSTAFA Versus THE STATE
1. Ghulam Mustafa son of Muhammad Ali, aged 30 years, was sent up by Police Station Factory Area, Lahore, for trial, for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, vide his judgment, dated 11-7-1990, convicted and sentenced him under section 302, P.P.C. to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default 2 years' R.I. it was further directed that the fine if recovered, half of it shall be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased. Convict has appealed. This judgment shall dispose of the appeal.
2. Prosecution story in brief as given in Exh.P.C., lodged by Muhammad Ramzan, was to the effect that his sister, Mst. Hamidan Bibi, was married to her cousin, Ghulam Mustafa, 8/9 years earlier. They had four children. The spouses did not get along very well. A few days before the registration of the case, said Ghulam Mustafa had turned out his wife and children after beating them, who came and started living with the first informant. On 12-6-1989, at 2 p.m. Ghulam Mustafa accused went to Pattoki in the house of the first informant and apologized for his behaviour whereupon first informant and his mother Mst. Bashiran Bibi took Mst. Hamidan and her children and came to his house at Chungi Amarsidhu, Lahore. At night they had dinner at the house of Ghulam Mustafa. Thereafter complainant with his mother and children slept in the courtyard of the house, whereas Ghulam Mustafa and Mst. Hamidan slept inside their room. At about 4 a.m. the first informant and his mother got up, on hearing alarm. They saw Ghulam Mustafa had put a cloth around the neck of Mst. Hamidan and had given twist to the same and with the other hand with a Chhuri he was causing injuries to Mst. Hamidan Bibi. The first informant and his mother saw the occurrence in electric light. When they came near, Ghulam Mustafa ran away alongwith his Chhuri. Mst. Hamidan died because of those injuries.
2. Complainant Exh.P.C. was lodged by Muhammad Ramzan, P.W.3 on 13-6-1989, at 5-15 a.m. It was recorded by Akhtar Hussain, S.I., P.W.8, at the spot which was 1/2 kilometre from Police Station Factory Area. F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 was recorded on the same day at 5-25 a.m. with regard to an occurrence which had taken place on 13-6-1989 at 4 a.m. inside the house of the appellant, Ghulam Mustafa.
3. P.W.8, Akhtar Hussain, S.I. after recording complaint Exh.P.C. came to the spot and prepared inquest report Exh.P.H. and injury statement Exh.P.J. and sent the dead body for autopsy. He took into possession blood-stained clothes Shirt P.5 and Shalwar P.6 of the accused which were lying on the cot, vide memo. Exh.P.E. He arrested the accused on 18-6-1989 and on the same day the accused while in the custody got recovered Chhuri .P.7 from his house which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.F. He got prepared the site plans Exhs.P.B. and P.B./1 from the Draftsman and gave his note in red ink thereunder. After usual investigation he challaned the accused.
4. P.W.7, Dr. Ahmad Saeed, on 14-6-1989, at 9-30 a.m. conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Mst. Hamidan Bibi and found the following injuries on her person:--
(1) Incised wound measuring 4 x 2 c.m. on right side of neck 4 x 5 c.m. behind below the right ear.
(2) Incised wound 6 x 5 c.m. on the outer aspect of right shoulder 1 x 5 c.m. below the top shoulder.
(3) Incised wound 2 x 2 c.m. on the outer aspect of right forearm. 7 c.m. below the right elbow.
(4) Multiple small circular wound of variable depth spreaded all over the front of body mainly on chest and abdomen, each measuring 0.3 x 0.3 c.m.
(5) Abrasion measuring 1.6 x 1.5 c.m. on the front of right knee.
(6) Bruised area measuring 7.5 x 11 c.m. on the front and left side of the neck starting just to the right of misline and extending upto left, ear and lower part extending to the left cervical.
5. In his opinion injuries were ante-mortem. Cause of death was blunt trauma to chest and abdomen causing haemorrhage and bruising of heart leading to shock and death. Injuries Nos.1, 2 and 3 were caused by sharp-edged weapon while rest of the injuries were caused by blunt means.
6. Prosecution in support of its case produced 8 witnesses in all. P.W.1, Mehmood Ahmed, F.C. escorted the dead body to mortuary. P.W.2, Yousaf Ali Shah had prepared site plans Exhs.P.B. and P.B./1. Ocular account was furnished by Muhammad Ramzan and Mst. Sharifan Bibi, P.Ws.3 and 4, respectively. Hakim Ali, P.W.5 had witnessed the recovery of blood-stained earth as well as recovery of blood-stained Chhuri P.7. He had signed both the memos. Dr. Ahmad Saeed, P.W.7 had conducted the post-mortem examination. Case was investigated by P.W.8 Akhtar Hussain S.I.
7. At the conclusion of prosecution evidence appellant was examined without oath. He refuted the prosecution allegations and pleaded innocence. He further stated that because of differences with his wife he had turned her out, who was living with her parents and he was not aware how and where she was done to death. He further stated that witnesses were interested and inimical, therefore, he was falsely involved.
8. It was contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the case against the appellant was- highly doubtful because eye-witnesses Muhammad Ramzan and Mst. Sharifan Bibi were neither residents of the house where the occurrence took place nor they were interested as well as inimical. Argued that there was no corroboration available in the instant case and the conviction could not be based on uncorroborated testimony of the eye-witnesses. Contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State.
2. I have heard the learned counsel at length and gone through the evidence with his assistance. Appellant is maternal-aunt's son of the first informant and of the deceased. No enmity or ill will of the eye-witnesses was suggested or brought on the file. The eye-witnesses had given a detailed account of the occurrence, in a very convincing manner. They were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing was brought on the file which even remotely could suggest their enmity with the appellant or motive for his false involvement. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the occurrence did not take place inside the house of the appellant cannot even be considered for the reason that both the eye-witnesses are admittedly residents of Pattoki. F.I.R. was lodged at 5-15 a.m., on the day of incident. If the eye witnesses were not present at Lahore how could F.I.R. be recorded within one hour of the occurrence. Similarly, the contention that occurrence did not take place inside the house of the appellant is also incorrect because immediately after recording the F.I.R., injury statement and inquest report of the deceased were prepared by the Investigating Officer indicating that she was found inside the house of the appellant. Blood-stained earth was also secured from the house of the appellant. Blood-stained clothes lying on the cot of the appellant inside his house were also secured at the same time. The I.O. in cross -examination was not even suggested that he had not secured the articles discussed above from the house of the appellant. In these circumstances it can safely be held that the occurrence took place inside the house of the appellant. The eye-witnesses had given convincing explanation with regard to their presence at the spot. When an occurrence takes place at the early hours of the morning then inmates of the house would be the natural witnesses and their statements cannot be discarded simply on the ground that they are interested being relations. Therefore, it is held that the eye-witnesses inspire confidence and can safely be relied upon. Their statements also find corroboration from the recovery of Chhuri at the instance of the appellant which was stained with human blood.
9. For what has been discussed above, it is held that prosecution has proved its case beyond doubt. Appeal fails which is dismissed. The appellant is however given benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
10. N.H.Q./G-111/L Appeal dismissed.