LIAQAT ALI Versus THE STATE

1. BASHIR A. MUJAHID, J. ‑‑‑ Liaqat Ali alias Pappi son of Mehrban Ali, appellant was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura under section 302, P.P.C. in case F.I.R. No.317 of 1994 registered at Police Station Muridkey, for commission of murder of Imtiaz alias Mithu and was convicted vide the impugned judgment, dated 22‑7‑1996 under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced to death and was also imposed fine of Rs.10,000, in default thereof sentenced to R.I. for three years. He was further ordered to pay compensation of Rs.10,000 under section 544‑A, Cr.P.C. to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased.

2. Necessary facts of the prosecution case are that F.I.R. No.317 of 1994 Exh.P.C./1 was registered on the statement Exh.P.C. of Waris Ali son of Ashiq Ali, P.W.4 recorded by Muhammad Iqbal, S.‑I. P.W.12 on 28‑8‑1994 at 4‑00 p.m. at Adda Rayanpura, stating therein that the complainant was employee in Area Office of State Life Insurance Company Ltd. at Muridkey. Mst. Walayat Bibi, paternal aunt of the complainant mother of the accused, one month before the occurrence came to the house of the complainant and in presence of the complainant and his younger brother Imtiaz alias Mithu (deceased), asked for hand of his sister from her parents for her son Liaqat Ali alias Pappi (appellant) which was refused because of his bad reputation. On the day of occurrence at 8/9 a.m., when the complainant was present at his duty. Liaqat alias Pappi came to the house of the complainant and insulted his parents and his brother Imtiaz alias Mithu by extending threats how they dared to refuse to give hand of sister of the complainant. Ashiq Ali, father of the complainant and his brother Imtiaz alias Mithu alongwith Safdar Ali son of Ali Akbar came to the complainant and informed him that the accused had extended threats to them and thereafter, the complainant alongwith his father Ashiq Ali, Imtiaz alias Mithu and Safdar Ali in order to go to their home boarded a bus from Adda Muridkay. Liaqat accused also boarded the same bus. When, the bus reached near Moor Kot Yaqub at 11 a.m. the bus stopped for deboarding the passengers. Liaqat alighted from the bus and started abusing Imtiaz alias Mithu, who also came down from the bus and both of them grappled with each other. The complainant, his father and Safdar Ali tried to intervene and also alightened from the bus. Meanwhile Liaqat alias Pappi took out mauser and fired in air to terrify them. Second fire he made direct at Imtiaz alias Mithu hitting him at his chest, who after receiving the injury fell on the ground. Liaqat alias Pappi ran towards Kot Yaqub while firing from his mauser. The occurrence was witnessed by the complainant, his father Ashiq Ali and Safdar Ali apart from others. Imtiaz alias Mithu was taken to Mayo Hospital in injured condition where he was admitted but succumbed to the injury.

3. Muhammad Iqbal, S.‑I. P.W.12 after recording the statement Exh.P.C. of Waris Ali P.W.4, sent the same for registration of case and arrived at the spot, collected the blood‑stained earth from the place of occurrence vide memo. Exh. P.D. Thereafter, he arrived at Mayo Hospital, Lahore, and took the dead body of Imtiaz into possession and prepared his injury statement vide memo. Exh.P.H. and inquest report Exh.P.I. and got the post‑mortem conducted through Dr. Tanveer Hussain, P.W.8 who found the following injury on his person:‑‑

(1) A transversely placed incised wound which had been stitched by one intact black silk stitch was placed on the right outer side of front of chest in right 6th inter-costal space. It was 8 c.m. to the right of midline and 5.5 c.m. below the right nipple at 5 O'Clock position. It was 1.5 c.m. in length.

(2) An incised stitched wound measuring 3 c.m. with two intact black silk stitches was placed transversely on the front of right side of chest, more on the outer lateral part. It was 5 c.m. to the right of right nipple at 8 O'Clock position, 24 c.m. below top of right shoulder and 6 c. m. above and outer to injury No. 1.

(3) Abrasion 0.5 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. on the mid of lower lib.

4. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death was injury to right lung, liver with portel vessels and inferior cava leading to severe haemorrhage, shock and death.

5. He recorded the statements of the prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was entrusted to Riasat Ali, S.‑I. P.W.11, who arrested accused Liaqat Ali., when the investigation was entrusted to Muhammad Sadiq, S.‑I. P.W.10 who or, 13‑10‑1994 recovered pistol .30 bore P.5 and megazine P.6 containing three live bullets on the pointation of the accused which were taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.J. This witness completed the investigation and submitted the challan. The accused denied the allegations and claimed the trial.

6. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused. Waris Ali, complainant was examined as P.W.4, he corroborated the version of the F.I.R. Ashiq Ali, father of the complainant and of the deceased was also eye‑witness of the occurrence, he was examined as P.W.5. His statement is in line with the statement of the complainant. He corroborated the prosecution story as an eye‑witness of the occurrence. Muhammad Saleem, P.W.6 was the recovery witness of weapon of offence. He attested the recovery memo. Exh.P.E. The remaining witnesses are of formal‑nature and need not to be discussed.

7. Towards the end of the trial, statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. was recorded, who denied the charge and claimed his innocence and false involvement.

8. The trial culminated into conviction of the appellant, who has challenged his conviction and sentence through Criminal Appeal No. 113/J of 1996 while the trial Court has sent up Murder Reference No.257 of 1996 for confirmation of death sentence under section 374, Cr.P.C. Both these matters are being decided by this judgment.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the prosecution witnesses are closely related inter see and it appears that the P.Ws. were not present at the spot and the appellant has been implicated merely on suspicion and due to previous grudge and animosity; that their statement has not been corroborated from any independent source; that the case of prosecution is doubtful and benefit of doubt should be extended in favour of the accused/appellant; that the alleged motive has not been proved, therefore, maximum penalty of death is too harsh in the circumstances of the case.

10. Conversely, the appeal has been opposed by the learned State Counsel, who has supported the impugned judgment.

11. Heard. Record perused.

12. The appellant is nominated accused in promptly lodged F.I.R. It is true that the parties are closely related inter se as the appellant is first cousin of the complainant, P.W.4 (Phoophizad) and sister's son of Ashiq, P.W.5 and‑there is no reason for his false implication or substitution by letting off the real culprits. They are natural witnesses. The ocular account has been fully corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of weapon of offence. After taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case, we are convinced that the prosecution case has been fully proved against the appellant and do not find any reason to interfere in the conviction recorded against the appellant.

13. As far as the sentence is concerned it has been admitted by Waris Ali complainant, P.W.4 and Ashiq Ali, P.W.5 that the deceased and the accused/appellant exchanged abuses and grappled with each other at the spot and it is not known what transpired between them immediately prior to the present occurrence. The accused cause' only one fire shot at the deceased and had not repeated the same despite the fact that the deceased was at his mercy, who was armed with mauser while the deceased and the prosecution witnesses were empty‑handed, therefore, we consider that on the basis of these extenuating circumstances this is a fit case where the sentence of death is to be reduced to imprisonment for life for safe administration of justice. Resultantly, the conviction of Liaqat Ali, appellant is maintained but sentence is reduced. Criminal Appeal No. 113/J of 1996 filed by the appellant is dismissed with the above modification. Punishment of fine is set aside being illegal. However, the punishment of compensation is maintained. Benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. will be available to the appellant. Death sentence is not confirmed.

14. Murder Reference is answered in negative.

15. H.B.T./L‑43/L Order accordingly.