Mst. SAJIDA BIBI Versus State

SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.--- This criminal appeal arises from the judgment dated 16.6.2011, whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Hafizabad convicted Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced her to imprisonment for life with direction to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C., which would be recoverable from her as arrears of land revenue. Benefit of section 382- B, Cr.P.C. was, however extended to him. It all happened on conclusion of her trial in case-FIR No.44/2010, dated 6.3.2010, registered for an offence under section 302, P.P.C., at police station Kassoki, District Hafizabad.

2. Precisely, the prosecution story as narrated by Karamat Ullah (complainant/P.W.4) in the FIR (Exh.PC/1) is that his sister Mst. Bushra Bibi had been married to Basharat Ahmad, about 26/27 years ago, but she remained issueless; his behnoi married again about eight months before, Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) and both the wives lived in the same house but they often quarrelled with each other; Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant), butchered his sister by means of Chhura, after a petty dispute, at 1.00 p.m. on 6.3.2010; on his sister's screaming, Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) reached the place of occurrence and found his sister writhing, soaked in blood; Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) exited the room by holding a blood stained Chhura in her hand; on seeing the witnesses, she threatened them to get back, otherwise she would kill them. He reported the matter to Azhar Abbas SI (P.W.11) by tendering an application (Exh.PC), who, on the basis whereof, registered FIR No.44/2010 (supra) at 2.30 p.m., the same day.

3. Dr. Tayyaba Kausar WMO (P.W.9) performed autopsy on the dead body of Mst. Bushra Bibi, at 7.30 p.m. on 6.3.2010, vide postmortem examination report (Exh.PF) and observed following injuries thereon:-

1. An incised wound measuring 16 cm x 05 cm on front of the neck, cutting all the soft tissues up to cervical vertebra just below the chin. Edges were clean cut.

2. An incised wound measuring 09 cm x 03 cm on front of neck in its middle, cutting all soft tissues. Edges were clean cut.

She opined that death in this case was due to excessive haemorrhage and shock, resulting from injuries Nos.1 and 2, which were fatal and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature, individually as well as collectively. The probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was "instantaneous" and that elapsed between death and postmortem examination was "six to nine hours".

4. Azhar Abbas SI (P.W.11) carried out the investigation of this case. He reached the spot, inspected the dead body of Mst. Bushra Bibi, prepared injury statement (Exh.PG), inquest report (Exh.PH), drafted application (Exh.PE) for post-mortem examination and despatched it to the mortuary for autopsy under the escort of Zafar Khan 172/C (P.W.10); he prepared visual site-plan (Exh.PJ) of the place of occurrence; collected blood through cotton from the place of occurrence, made it into a sealed parcel and prepared seizure memo. Exh.PA; he arrested the accused Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant), the same day (6.3.2010) and recovered blood stained Chhura (P1) at her instance, which he seized vide memo Exh.PB; he got prepared site-plan in-scale (Exh.PK and Exh.PK/1) of the place of occurrence by Masood Ahmad Bhatti draftsman (P.W.12). On completion of investigation, he prepared report under section 173, Cr.P.C. and submitted it before the learned trial court for trial of the accused in accordance with the law.

5. On indictment, the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial. The prosecution produced twelve witnesses, namely Saif Ullah (P.W.1), Khizar Hayat (P.W.2), Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3), Karamat Ullah (complainant/P.W.4), Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5), Ahmad Khan (P.W.6), Muhammad Asif, 400/MHC (P.W.7), Amanat Ali 343/C (P.W.8), Dr. Tayyaba Kausar WMO (P.W.9), Zafar Khan 172/C (P.W.10), Azhar Abbas SI/IO (P.W.11) and Masood Ahmad Bhatti draftsman (P.W.12), in order to prove its case. Thereafter, the appellant was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., whereby she proclaimed her absolute innocence in the matter. While answering the question, why this case against her and why the PWs had deposed against her, she stated as under:-

"I have been involved falsely, in this case mala fide with ulterior motive, as my marriage with Basharat Ahmad was his second marriage, against the wishes of complainant who is real brother of Bushra Bibi (deceased) the first wife of Basharat Ahmad and his other relatives who had grudge against me for my marriage with Basharat Ahmad, which has been admitted by PW5. I had no motive to murder Mst. Bushra Bibi as I had already her knowledge being first wife of my husband. Had I committed such occurrence, my husband or any other housemate who had been living in the same house must have come forward for registration of case, or at least in witness box but as none of them was to support the concocted story of prosecution, so then have not been produced. The PWs are inter se related and inimical towards me, so deposed falsely."

She declined to make statement on oath or lead any evidence in defence.

Learned trial court concluded trial of the appellant through the impugned judgment by holding her guilty of the charge and awarded her the sentence, in mentioned terms.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that Mst. Bushra Bibi was murdered by some unknown person and Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) had no link with it, but this murder has been thrust upon her under a conspiracy by the complainant-side, being in league with the police: there is no eye-witness of the occurrence and the ocular account, as to having seen the appellant emerging from the room of the deceased with a Churri in hand, by Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) is nothing, but sheer exaggeration, as they had no purpose to be present there then; the hands and clothes of the appellant were not found stained with blood, which badly reflected on the veracity of allegation against her the medical evidence as tendered by Dr. Tayyaba Kausar WMO (P.W.9) did not corroborate the ocular account, as author of injuries on the neck of the deceased must have been drenched in blood, that gushed through her completely cut carotid vessels, trachea and oesophagus; no inmate of the house of the occurrence, who were about a dozen in number, corroborated the allegation against the appellant despite being present there at the relevant time of the occurrence; the impugned judgment is but based on conjectural and whimsical inferences, which may be set aside and the appellant may be acquitted of the charge.

7. In contrast to it, learned Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab has defended the impugned judgment by contending that the prosecution case brimmed with connecting evidence against the appellant, who committed cold-blooded murder of Mst. Bushra Bibi for none of her fault.

8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length and minutely going through the relevant record, it is observed to be a case, wherein no one saw the appellant-lady butchering Mst. Bushra Bibi, who was also the wife of Basharat Ahmad, like the appellant was, and they both lived in the same house with him. The place of occurrence was, too, abided by Mst. Rasoolan Bibi real mother and Nasir Ahmad real brother of Basharat Ahmad, whose wife and six children, five daughters and a son, also lived thereat, which consisted of four rooms. Mubarak Ahmad, another brother of Basharat Ahmad lived in the adjoining house with his wife and seven children. The visual site-plan (Exh.PJ) would endorse the said fact, as it showed his residence attached with that of Basharat Ahmad on its eastern side. The house of Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3) adjoined the house of occurrence on its southern side, as evidenced by the visual site-plan (Exh.PJ). Khizar Hayat (P.W.2), who pointed out Chhuri (P1) to the police for recovery thereof through seizure-memo. (Exh.PB) reached the place of occurrence at 1.15 p.m. on 6.3.2010 and found Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) sitting in "another room" of the house.

Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5), who is real brother of Karamatullah (complainant/P.W.4) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6), a cousin of the complainant, are witnesses of the ocular account, having seen the appellant, come out of the room of Mst. Bushra Bibi (deceased) with a Chhuri in hand at about 1.00 p.m. on 6.3.2010, lived at a distance of about 2/3 acres from the place of occurrence, in separate houses, adjacently, located inter se. Karamat Ullah (complainant/P.W.4) is a resident of Chak Chatha, tehsil and district Hafizabad and house of occurrence is situated in village Peer Kot (Hafizabad). He reached the spot after he learnt about the occurrence from someone, not named. Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) make the most crucial prosecution witnesses, as they entered the doomed house on hearing hue and cry from inside and found the appellant-lady stepping out of the room of occurrence with a Chhuri in hand. They, as per their contentions, were on way to city Hafizabad from the village then, which only meant that they were the chance witnesses. They did not disclose the purpose of their journey to city Hafizabad and adopted divergent contentions about their getting together, before leaving for the said place. Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) stated that he did not specifically ask Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) to accompany him, but the latter deposed that the former had called him from his house to go to Hafizabad. About his claim of moving to Hafizabad along with Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5), Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) was confronted with his statement (Exh.DA) under section 161, Cr.P.C., wherein it was not found so recorded. The nearest person living around, Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3), whose house was adjacent to the appellant's house, reached there at 1.30 p.m. despite being present at his house, and he did not see any Chhuri in the hand of the appellant. The self-styled eye-witnesses had no purpose to be present near the place of occurrence and the one, they deposed about, was negated by the previous statement (Exh.DA) of Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) recorded by the police. It is easily inferable from the statements of Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3), Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) that their contention of having heard hue and cry from the house of the appellant was patently false. The husband, the mother in-law and other inmates of the house were not deaf that they could not hear shrieks of Mst. Bushra Bibi and persons distantly living, heard it and reached there. Both the witnesses (P.W.5 and P.W.6) did not contend that Chhuri in the hand of the appellant was blood-stained or her clothes were smeared with blood. The extensive incised wound on the neck of the deceased had cut all the soft tissues, including carotid vessels, trachea and oesophagus up to the cervical vertebra and a stream of blood must have gushed through it, staining the hands, arms and clothes of the butcher, but nothing of the sort was noticed by, the said witnesses on the body and attire of the appellant. They did not tell, if floor of the room was blood-muddy or it bore foot-marks/prints of the appellant. If they had heard shrieks of ill-fated Mst. Bushra Bibi from inside the house, when she was being slaughtered and they abruptly entered the house, they should have found her body badly convulsing, but they, instead, noticed her already dead. It is not the prosecution case that she had washed her hands or changed her clothes, when she was seen by the said witnesses almost at the time of committing the offence as she had no time at all to do so. It showed, how truthful or otherwise they were.

9. The woman medical officer has mentioned deeply located incised wounds on the neck of the deceased, which could only be inflicted, if she had been made helpless by a group of persons or already rendered unconscious by administering some drugs to her, but in such a situation, how could she make a noise, is a crucial circumstance. If pitted against only one person, the luckless deceased-lady would have desperately resisted the onslaught to save herself. When her throat was cut, she must have convulsed and her body spasmodically quivered, but no such evidence could be found by the Investigating Officer (P.W.11). One can well imagine as to how an animal violently shuddered, when slaughtered. The condition of the deceased lady wouldn't have been different, if done to death in the manner, as alleged. The floor and walls of the room would have been found sputtered with blood due to violent movements of her body, but nothing of the sort was visible from the crime-scene. It probably meant that she might have been sedated or tranquilized before being butchered. If it is so, the eye-witnesses' assertion to have heard her shrieks, when being slaughtered is nothing but a false claim. The Investigating Officer (P.W.11) could not properly read the crime-scene nor could he correctly understand the situation, otherwise his line of investigation might have been different. He, as per inquest report (Exh.PH), found the dead body placed on a cot, but he did not take this cot into possession nor he seized any blood stained bedding spread thereon. The testimonies of Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.5) and Ahmad Khan (P.W.6) lack intrinsic sense of believability and do not appeal to reason and logic or prudence. Their evidence is, thus, discarded.

10. The medical evidence, as tendered by Dr. Tayyaba Kausar WMO (P.W.9) overwhelmingly suggested that Mst. Bushra Bibi (deceased) offered no resistance, when she was brutally murdered, as edges of both the neck-wounds were cleanly cut. It lent strength to the impression that she might have been in a state of trance, when butchered. The woman medical officer showed inexperience by not collecting the blood or stomach contents or not chopping-off some internal viscera of the deceased for despatching them to the Forensic Science Agency for detection of poison or drugs (sedative/tranquilizer), otherwise such an exercise, if taken, might have made it easier to understand, as to how the edges of her wounds were found cleanly cut. Except for two fatal incised wounds on the neck of the deceased, the woman medical officer found no other injury mark on her body, which made it still essential for her to unearth the cause of the edges thereof, being cleanly cut. Here, she made a mistake for not resorting to the said investigative activity. The medical evidence merely shows that Mst. Bushra Bibi had been slaughtered to death but it did not altogether exclude the probability of some drugs having been used to render her senseless, before being murdered. This piece of evidence may half corroborate the prosecution case, but not fully.

11. The prosecution heavily relied on the recovery of Chhuri (P1) at the instance of the appellant from underneath a cot, but circumstances leading to this recovery are not free from doubt. The seizure-memo (Exh.PB) qua Chhuri (P1) has been attested by Khizar Hayat (P.W.2) and Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3), the scribe thereof being Azhar Abbas SI/I0 (P.W.11). Khizar Hayat (P.W.2) mentioned about this recovery, as if having been effected from a room, other than the room of occurrence. He stated that Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) told him rather "pointed out" a Chhuri lying inside the room and on arrival of the police, he pointed it (P1) to them, whereon Azhar Abbas SI/IO (P.W.11) took it into possession vide memo. of recovery Exh.PB. Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3) also deposed about recovery of Chhuri (P1) from underneath a cot but he said nothing, if it was blood stained. He, as he said, reached the house of the appellant on hearing hue and cry and found many a persons, already gathered there. He saw the Chhuri (P1), when it was shown to him by the police. This is what he had deposed about in his testimony. Similar is the statement of Azhar Abbas SI (P.W.11), who contended that he arrested Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant) from the place of occurrence, but she was present in the adjacent room, wherefrom she got recovered Chhuri (P1), which he took into possession vide memo. of recovery (Exh.PB) and got it attested by Khizar Hayat (P.W.2) and Muhammad Sajid (P.W.3). He prepared rough site plan of the place of recovery (Exh.PB/1). He drew a sketch of the Chhuri (P1) on the memo of recovery (Exh.PB), which did not assimilate in any manner with the one, having been drawn on the rear of the Chemical Examiner's report (Exh.PM). Both the sketches have no resemblance with each other and it looked as if some other weapon, than the one, shown in Exh.PB had been transmitted to the office of the Chemical Examiner, so as to manage a positive report about its being blood stained. This discrepancy would not only nullify the evidence of recovery of Chhuri (P 1), but also reduce the evidentiary value of the Serologist's report (Exh.PM/1) a nullity in the eye of law. The recovery-evidence did not corroborate the prosecution case in any manner, being inconsequential.

12. The complainant Karamat Ullah (P.W.4) alleged in complaint (Exh.PC) that Mst. Sajida Bibi (appellant), who is second wife of Basharat Ahmad often quarrelled with his sister Mst. Bushra Bibi (deceased), the first wife of Basharat Ahmad and in this background, she murdered her by means of a Chhura. He did not, however, say a word in his testimony in this regard. The other prosecution witnesses also kept silent on this issue, so motive set up by the complainant in the FIR (Exh.PC/1) has gone unestablished.

13. The appellant refuted the charge against her under section 342, Cr.P.C. by contending that she had been falsely involved in this case by the brother and other members of the family of Mst. Bushra Bibi. She maintained, if he had committed the occurrence, her husband or other inmates of the house would have burdened her with this liability and tendered evidence against her before the court. She stated herself innocent and pointed out to the prosecution witnesses for having falsely involved her in the case, as they were not pleased with her marriage with Basharat Ahmad, who had earlier married their issueless relation, Mst. Bushra Bibi (deceased). The defence plea of the appellant is not too important to be discussed further, as it is nothing but a denial simpliciter qua the occurrence.

14. In a nutshell, the prosecution has badly failed to bring home guilt of the appellant beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt. The impugned judgment can certainly not be held worth sustaining, because of so many inherent defects therein. The discussion made hereinabove leads to an irresistible conclusion that the appellant had not committed the crime. The impugned judgment is nothing but an ill-founded pronouncement, which is liable to be annulled. Done accordingly.

15. Resultantly, this appeal is accepted, the conviction/sentence of the appellant is set aside and she is acquitted of the charge. She is in custody, so she is ordered to be released from the prison forthwith if not required to be detained in any other case.

WA/S-47/L Appeal accepted.