2023 P Cr. L J 387
[Balochistan]
Before Abdullah Baloch and Rozi Khan Barrech, JJ
ABDULLAH ---Appellant
Versus
The STATE--- Respondent
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 50 of 2021, decided on 22nd August, 2022.
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) ---
----Ss. 302(b), 337- A & 337- D--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Accused was
charged for committing murder of his wife and caused dagger blow to his mother ---Ocular
account of the incident had been furnished by mother and sister -in-law of the accused ---
Record showed that both the witnesses recorded their statements in line with each other ---
Said witnesses brought the house inmates, their presence in the house at the relevant time
was not disputed and was natural ---Accused was the son of a witness, as such, it was also
beyond imagination that a mother might have falsely implicate her own son in the false case, when naturally a mother was the most selfless person ---In such like situation and keeping in
view the love and affection of mother towards her son, it was beyond imagination that a
mother could falsely implicate her own son in a false case, when more particularly the accused was the only source of their bread and butter ---Statement of witness being mother
was most credible and worth credence than any other witness, as she was giving evidence against her own son and more particularly she was also attacked upon by the accused ---
Under the law the evidence of a injured witness was most credible than any other witness ---
Since said witness herself was injured in the incident, thus according to settled norms of justice, the solitary statement of injured witness being confidence inspiring was sufficient to convict the culprit, as such, legally the statement of an injured witness could not be challenged ---Circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully proved the
charges leveled against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt ---Appeal against conviction
was dismissed accordingly.
Farooq Khan v. State 2008 SCMR 917 rel.
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---
----Ss. 302(b), 337- A & 337- D--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence --- Direct evidence--
- Scope --- Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife and causing dagger blow
to his mother ---Conduct of the accused had strengthened the case of prosecution, who despite
murder of his wife kept mum and had not lodged report against any one and even had not held responsible to any third person for such brutal murder of his wife, who received more
than eleven deep wounds on her person--- Besides, it had also been established through
record that at the time of said murder, the accused was present in his house and the crime
weapon was also recovered from his possession---Accused also not disputed the unnatural death of his wife ---All the said facts suggested that actually it was the accused, who had
committed the murder of his wife and injured his mother ---Direct, circumstantial and medical
evidence was fully implicating the accused with the murder of his wife and circulation of
such information to landlord of accused as well as receipt of such information to the Levies
Control Room had further corroborated the direct evidence ---Circumstances established that
the prosecution had successfully proved the charges levelled against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt ---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.
Arshad Mehmood v. The State 2005 SCMR 1524 rel.
(c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---
----Ss. 302(b), 337- A & 337- D---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl -i-amd-
-- Appreciation of evidence ---Defence plea--- Scope ---Accused was charged for committing
murder of his wife and causing dagger blow to his mother ---Sole defence plea taken by the
accused was that due to depression, anxiety and being sole bread winner of his own family as well as to that of his brother's family, he had lost his senses ---Accused denied the accusation
of murder, but his plea was giving impression that the crime was committed due to depression and loosing senses ---Such plea of the accused could not in any manner considered
to let him free or exonerate him from the charges, who brutally murdered his wife by inflicting more than eleven dagger blows and even he injured his own mother ---Even
otherwise, the defence had failed to bring any iota of evidence that the accused at the time of
commission of crime was unsound person---In absence of any medical evidence, the bald plea of the accused was not admissible under the law ---Admittedly, the accused in order to
save his skin from the consequences had taken such baseless plea, which otherwise could not be made basis to exonerate him from the charges of brutal murder of his own wife as well as the murder of his unborn baby as the deceased had three months pregnancy as well as assaulting to his mother ---Held that there were sufficient incriminatory evidence on record
establishing the unnatural death of the deceased and injuring to injured by the accused through dagger, which was recovered from his possession soon after the occurrence ---
Circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully proved the charges levelled against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt ---Appeal against conviction was dismissed
accordingly.
Muhammad Khair Mengal for Appellant.
Ameer Hamza Mengal, Additional P.G. for the State.
Date of hearing: 16th August, 2022.
JUDGMENT
ABDULLAH BALOCH, J. ---The appellant Abdullah son of Shah Muhammad has
filed this Criminal Jail Appeal No.50/2021 through Superintendent Central Prison Mach,
assailing his conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Sessions Judge/MCTC Killa Saifullah ("the trial Court") vide judgment dated 23rd September 2021 ("the impugned judgment"), whereby he has been convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for Life with compensation of Rs.5,00,000/ - (Rupees Five Lac) to the
legal heirs of deceased Bibi Malala as per provisions contained under section 544- A, Cr.P.C.
or in default thereof to further suffer S.I. for six months. The appellant has also been convicted under section 337- E(2)(b), Q&D and sentenced to suffer two (02) years' R.I. and
pay Daman of Rs.5,000/ - to the victim, with the benefit of section 382 -B, Cr.P.C.
2. It is the case of prosecution that on 16th December 2020, the complainant Fazal
Muhammad Dafedar lodged FIR No.19/2021, at Levies Thana Killa Saifullah, under sections 302, 337- AD, P.P.C., with the averments that on the said date at about 11.30 p.m. levies
control received information that a person has killed his wife by means of dagger at Shan Uddin Tube well, situated in Khasnoob, Killa Saif Ullah, thus on the basis of such information the levies officials rushed to the place of incident, encircled the house of appellant and during search they arrested the appellant along with dagger, while found the dead body of deceased Mst. Malala lying in pool of blood in a room, sings of dagger blows
were present on her body, while the appellant has also caused dagger blow to his mother
namely Bibi Jana. They brought the dead body and injured to hospital for examination.
3. In pursuance of the above FIR, the appellant was investigated and on completion
thereof, he was challaned in the trial Court, which indicated the charge and after refuting the same by the appellant, the prosecution examined nine (09) witnesses. The appellant was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant neither recorded his statement on oath
under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produced any witness in his defense. On conclusion of trial and after hearing the arguments, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned above in Para No.1, whereafter instant Criminal Jail Appeal has been filed before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel and perused the available record. Perusal of record reveals
that the prosecution in order to establish the charge has produced direct, circumstantial and medical evidence and also produced the crime weapon i.e. Dagger through which the deceased was Bibi Malala was murdered and Bibi Jana was injured. Undoubtedly, the deceased Bibi Malala was the wife of appellant Abdullah, who was murdered in the house of the appellant. It has been observed that all the witnesses so produced by the prosecution are the close relatives of both the appellant and the deceased Bibi Malala, thus it is not expected that the close relatives would involve their own blood relation and will let free the real culprits. However, before dilating upon ocular testimony, it would be appropriate to first discuss the medical evidence.
5. It has been observed that soon after getting information, the levies officials reached at
the place of occurrence and shifted the deceased Mst. Malala and injured Bibi Jana (PW- 2) to
District Headquarter Hospital, Killa Saif Ullah. PW -8 Dr. Akhtar Muhammad, Senior
Medical Officer, examined the deceased and after examination issued Death Certificate as Ex.P/8- A and MLC Ex.P/8 -A-1, perusal whereof transpire that the deceased had received
eleven wounds on her head, left shoulder towards chest, armpit, neck, arms, right hand, left
shoulder to waist and chest. It has also been transpired that at the time of her murder, the
deceased had three months pregnancy. Suffice to observe here that the unnatural death of deceased Mst. Malala has also not been disputed by the defence, but however, pleaded his false implication. Besides, the inquest report prepared by the I.O. under section 174, Cr.P.C. also confirms multiple deep wounds on the person of deceased. PW -8 also examined PW -2
Bibi Jana and confirmed that the PW -2 received deep wound on the left side of the back.
Thus, the unnatural death of deceased has been confirmed by the prosecution through medical evidence.
6. The prosecution in order to establish the charge has produced the evidence of nine
witnesses. The complainant of the case Fazal Muhammad, Dafedar, appeared as PW- 1, who
reiterated the contents of fard -e-bayan Ex.P/1- A, wherein he has stated that on the day of
occurrence pursuant to information received by the Levies Control Room that a person committed the murder of his wife, the complainant along with other levies officials reached at the house of appellant, encircled the house and arrested the appellant along with crime weapon i.e. Dagger stained with blood and also found the dead body of deceased Bibi Malala in a room of the house lying in the pool of blood, while the mother of appellant PW -2 Bibi
Jana was found in injured condition. According to complainant the dagger blows were
apparent on the body of the deceased. The statement of complainant has further been
corroborated by PW -7 Shan- ud-Din, who is the landlord of appellant and the appellant was
his Buzgar. According to PW -7, on the night of occurrence, the appellant made him phone
call that he committed the murder of his wife and as such he (PW -7) advised the appellant to
remain in his house. Whereafter, he (PW -7) informed the Levies about the occurrence, who
reached at the spot and arrested the appellant. Both the witnesses i.e. PW- 1 and PW -7
correctly identified the appellant in the trial Court.
7. The first star witness of the prosecution is PW -2 Bibi Jana, who is not only the
mother of appellant, but also she sustained dagger injuries in the said incident. PW -2 stated
that on the night of occurrence, she along with the appellant, the deceased and other family members including her sister -in-law Bibi Amina after taking dinner were preparing to sleep
and the appellant took his wife Bibi Malala towards room, who were being followed by her (PW -2) and as soon as the appellant and his wife reached in the room, the appellant assaulted
Bibi Malala through knife blows, due to which she started shouting and the appellant also hit her (PW -2) through knife. Whereafter, the officials came and arrested his son Abdullah and
they also took them to hospital. PW -2 confirmed that the officials also got recovered the
crime weapon from her son.
8. The second star witness of the occurrence is PW- 3 Bibi Amina, who is the sister -in-
law of appellant and the daughter -in-law of PW -2. She recorded her statement in line to
the statement of PW -2 and stated that after taking dinner, the appellant being her brother -in-
law took his wife towards room, who were followed by her mother -in-law (PW -2) and
after a while she heard shouting and she saw that the appellant hit his wife and mother (PW-2) with knife. Thereafter, the officials came and arrested the appellant and also recovered the knife from his possession.
9. We have taken into consideration, the statements of both the star witnesses with
utmost care and caution and observed that both the witnesses recorded their statements in
line with each other. They being the house inmates, their presence in the house at the relevant time is not disputed and natural. The appellant is the son of PW -2, as such, it is also
beyond imagination that a mother may falsely implicate her own son in the false case, when naturally a mother is the most selfless person in this world, who starts loving her children
even before they come into this world. Nothing could be compared to a mother's love in this
world as it is the purest form of love. Mother is like an angel for her child, who always loves
her child and supports him/her. It is the mother who always loves her children without expecting anything from them in return. Thus, in such like situation and keeping in view the love and affection of mother towards her son, it is beyond imagination that a mother (PW -2)
can falsely implicate her own son (appellant) in a false case, when more particularly the appellant is the only source of their bread and butter. The statement of PW -2 being mother is
most credible and worth credence than any other witness, as she is giving evidence against her own son and more particularly she was also attacked upon by the appellant and under the law the evidence of a injured witness is most credible than any other witness. Since PW -2
herself was injured in the incident, thus according to settled norms of justice, the solitary statement of injured witness being confidence inspiring is sufficient to convict the culprit, as such, legally the statement of an injured witness cannot be challenged. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case of Farooq Khan v. State, 2008 SCMR 917, wherein it has been held that, "
7... The presence of the injured P.Ws. at the place of occurrence is intrinsic and could not be doubted because it was unchallenged. Statement of P.W.8 is consistent,
straightforward and trustworthy with no cogent reason in evidence to disbelieve the same.
8. The defence has also not doubted or challenged the injuries sustained by the injured P.W. in cross -examination. The injuries sustained by P.W.8 have been duly supported
by medical evidence furnished by P.W.10 Dr. Humayun Khan who ruled out that the injuries on person of Namoos Khan P.W.8 were self -inflicting injuries.
9. As to the argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the solitary statement of injured P.W.8 was the basis of conviction, suffice it to observe that the injured prosecution witness had given the number of injuries caused to the deceased in the incident by attributing the responsibility to the appellant. Evidence of this witness has been supported by medical evidence furnished by Dr. Muhammad Maqsood P.W.6 who conducted post -mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Zahir
Khan. The evidence of injured witness is worthy of credence, independent and natural and there was no lawful justifiable cause to discard his evidence. The credence of statement of solitary witness has already been examined by this Court in a number of cases. In this context reference can be made to Mali v. The State 1969 SCMR 76; Muhammad Ashraf v. The State 1971 SCMR 530, Muhammad Siddique alias Ashraf alias Achhi and 3 others v. The State 1971 SCMR 659 and Muhammad Mansha v. The State 2001 SCMR 199".
10. The conduct of the appellant has also strengthened the case of prosecution, who
despite murder of his wife kept mum and has not lodged report against any one and even has not held responsible to any third person for such brutal murder of his wife, who received
more than eleven deep wounds on her persons. Besides, it has also been established through
record that at the time of said murder, the appellant was present in his house and the crime weapon was also recovered from his possession. The appellant also not disputed the unnatural death of his wife. All these facts suggest that actually it was the appellant, who has committed the murder of his wife and injured his mother (PW -2). Hence, the direct,
circumstantial and medical is fully implicating the appellant with the murder of Mst. Malala
and circulation of such information to PW -7 as well as receipt of such information to the
Levies Control Room has further corroborated the direct evidence. Reliance in regard is
placed on the case of Arshad Mehmood v. The State, 2005 SCMR 1524, wherein it has been held that:
"We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the evidence produced by the complainant. It may be noted that dead body of deceased was recovered from the house of the petitioner where Mst. Sqfia was living with him as his wife. Therefore, it is not possible to disbelieve the story of the prosecution."
11. The sole defence plea taken by the appellant that due to depression, anxiety and being
sole bread winner of his own family as well as to that of his brother's family, he had lost his senses. Though, the appellant denied the accusation of murder, but his plea is giving
impression that the crime was committed due to depression and loosing senses. Such plea of
the appellant cannot in any manner considered to let him free or exonerate him from the charges, who brutally murdered his wife by inflicting more than eleven dagger blows and even he injured his own mother. Even otherwise, the defence has failed to bring any iota of evidence that the appellant at the time of commission of crime was unsound person. In absence, of any medical evidence, the bald plea of the appellant is not admissible under the law. Admittedly, the appellant in order to save his skin from the consequences has taken such
baseless plea, which otherwise cannot be make basis to exonerate him from the charges of brutal murder of his own wife as well as the murder of his unborn baby as the deceased had three months pregnancy as well as assaulting to his mother and we have no hesitation to hold that there are sufficient incriminatory evidence on record establishing the unnatural death of the deceased Mst. Malala and injuring to PW -2 Bibi Jana by the appellant through dagger,
which was recovered from his possession soon after the occurrence.
12. The overall reappraisal of the evidence available on record, it is concluded that the
prosecution has successfully established the charge of murders of wife and unborn baby and assault against the appellant beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt; that all the witnesses remained firm in their deposition; that they fully supported the prosecution version and the defence has failed to cause any dent in the same; that the trial Court after proper appraisal of evidence available on record has rightly awarded conviction and sentence to the appellant; that the appellant has failed to point out any mala fide on the part of the PWs for his false implication, who otherwise are also his blood relations, that the crime weapon was recovered from the possession of appellant at the time of his arrest; that the appellant has' failed to point out any material contradiction and discrepancy which could benefit the defence version; that there is no error of law, misreading or non- reading of evidence in judgment
passed by the trial Court calling for interference by this Court.
For the above reasons, the appeal being devoid of merits is dismissed.
JK/134/Bal. Appeal dismissed.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.