THE
HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Appeal No.269 of 2018
Confirmation Reference No.05 of 2018
Present:
Mr.
Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr.
Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha
Appellant: Muhammad Wakeel
alias Makhan son of Muhammad Rakhi through Syed Abdul Waheed, Advocate
Respondent: The State through Mr.
Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh
Date of hearing: 24.01.2019
Date of announcement: 31.01.2019
J U D G M E N T
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Appellant
Muhammad Wakeel alias Makhan son of Muhammad Rakhi was tried by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Karachi South in Sessions Case No.295/2009 for
offences under Section 302(b), PPC. On conclusion of trial, vide judgment dated
23.04.2018, appellant was convicted under Section 302(b), PPC and sentenced to
death as Tazir on three counts. Appellant was directed to pay compensation of
100,000/- as required under section 544-A, Cr.PC to the legal heirs of deceased
Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi and Master Anees Ahmed. In case of default in
payment of compensation, appellant was ordered to suffer S.I. for six months
more on each count.
2.
Brief facts of the
prosecution case as disclosed in the FIR are that SIP Muhammad Younus of P.S.
Boat Basin, Karachi has stated that on 07.05.2009 he along with subordinate
staff was busy in patrolling duty, when the police party reached near Chappel
Resort, Block-1, Clifton, at 1900 hours, received information on phone from one
person, namely, Ansar regarding firing in a house. After receipt of such
information, the police party reached at the place of incident and saw the
present accused at the house of deceased Ikhtiar Ahmed, he was carrying a
repeater in his hand and was moving here and there. It is further stated that
accused issued threat to the police, not to come near to him, else he would
fire upon them. It is further stated that accused disclosed that he had
committed murder of Ikhtiar Ahmed and his family. SIP Muhammad Younus informed
the SHO about the incident. Accused was arrested at the spot. Unlicensed
repeater was recovered from his possession in presence of mashirs. SHO also
reached at the place of occurrence. Police entered the house and found the dead
bodies of Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi and master Anis Ahmed. After
completing the necessary formalities, all the three dead bodies were sent to
the JPMC for conducting the postmortem examinations and report. FIR of the
incident was lodged by SIP Muhammad Younus, it was recorded vide crime
No.244/2009 at P.S. Boat Basin under sections 302, PPC.
Separate FIR under section 13(d) of the Arms Ordinance was also registered
against the accused. During
investigation, clothes of the accused were collected, two empties and
bloodstained earth were collected from spot and the same were sent to the
chemical/ballistic experts for examination and report. After usual
investigation, challan was submitted against the accused under the above
referred sections.
3.
Learned Sessions
Judge, Karachi South framed charge against accused Muhammad Wakeel under section 302, PPC at
Ex.3.Accused pleaded not guilty and
claimed to be tried.
4.
At trial, prosecution examined PW-1 Ansar Mehmood at Ex.5, he produced
mashirnama of arrest of accused and recovery of repeater at Ex.5/A, mashirnama
fo place of wardat at Ex.5/B; PW-2 SIP Riaz Hussain at Ex.6, he produced
inquest report of deceased persons and certificates of cause of death Ex.6/K,
6/L and 6/M; PW-3 SIP Raja Muhammad Javed at Ex.7, he produced rahdari
certificate at Ex.7/A; PW-4 ASI Moula Bux at Ex.9, he produced postmortem
reports of deceased Mst. Maqsooda Bibi at Ex.9/B, Ikhtiar Ahmed 9/C and Master
Anis at Ex.9/D, report of ballistic expert at Ex.9/J, report of chemical
examiner at Ex.9/K. He has been examined by the prosecution as well conversant
with the signatures and handwriting of Ghulam Farid investigation officer,
whose whereabouts were not known after his retirement. PW-5 Abdul Ghaffar at Ex-10,
PW-6 Dr. Farida Mubeenuddin, senior WMO at Ex.12, she had conducted postmortem
examination of deceased Mst. Maqsooda. Dr. Pardeep Kumar at Ex.13, he had conducted
postmortem examination of two deceased persons Ikhtiar Ahmed and another small
kid, namely, Master Anis. PW-8 SIP Muhammad Younus, who produced FIR
No.224/2009, registered at P.S. Boat Basin against accused under section 302,
PPC for committing murders of Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi and Master Anis
Ahmed. HC Nusrat Iqbal at Ex.15 as process server, who returned process issued
against PWs Mst. Rehana and Asghar Mehmood as un-served with the endorsement
that they had shifted to some unknown place and their whereabouts were not
known. Thereafter, learned ADPP
closed the prosecution side vide statement at Ex.16.
5.
Statement of
accused was recorded under section 342, Cr.PC at Ex.17. Learned Additional
Sessions Judge-XII, Karachi South, on the day of final arguments noticed that
all the incriminating pieces of evidence were not put to accused in his
statement recorded under section 342, Cr.PC at Ex.17 and ordered for recording
the statement of accused under section 342, Cr.PC afresh by putting all the incriminating
pieces of evidence brought on record against him by the prosecution. Statement
of accused under section 342, Cr.PC was recorded afresh by the trial court at
Ex.21. Accused gave evidence on oath and raised plea that he has no knowledge
regarding the murders and claimed innocence. No evidence was led in defence.
6.
Trial court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and assessment
of evidence available on record, vide judgment dated 23.04.2018 convicted and
sentenced the appellant to death as stated above. Trial court has also made reference
to this Court for confirmation of death sentence as required under section 374,
Cr.PC.
7.
Learned advocate
for the appellant mainly argued that incident was un-witnessed; that prosecution story was
unnatural and unbelievable; that it was unbelievable that accused after
commission of murders was standing at the house of the deceased persons armed
with weapon. Learned defence counsel further contended that repeater and
empties were sent to the ballistic expert after about 15 days of the incident
and delay in sending the same to the experts has not been explained. It is argued
that positive reports in view of unexplained delay would not improve the case
of the prosecution. Lastly, contended that material witnesses Mrs. Rehana and
Azhar have not been examined by prosecution. Presumption would be in case they
would have been examined, they might have not supported the case of
prosecution. In support of his contentions, learned defence counsel relied upon
following cases:
1. 2017 SCMR 596 (Mst.
Rukhsana Begum & others vs. Sajjad & Others)
2. 2017 SCMR 701
(Khuda-e-Dad alias Pehlwan Vs. The State)
3. 2017 SCMR 986
(Hashim Qasim and another vs. The State)
4. 2017 SCMR 1155
(Abdul Jabbar alias Jabbari vs. The State)
5. 2017 SCMR 1871
(Muhammad Riaz vs. The State and others)
6. 2017 SCMR 1797
(Allah Wasaya versus The State)
8.
Learned D.P.G. argued that Mst. Rehana
narrated incident to PW Ansar and her husband Azhar who was working with Ansar
at carpenter shop and Ansar along with Azhar went to the place of incident and
found appellant inside the room. It is further argued that appellant was
carrying repeater. In the meanwhile, on the call of Ansar, police officials
reached and accused was arrested with repeater within half an hour. It is
further argued that Ansar acted as mashir of arrest of accused and recovery of
the repeater and bloodstained clothes of the accused. He has further argued
that bloodstained clothes, 2 empties of 12 bore and 4 pellets were sent to the
Chemical/Ballistic experts and their reports were positive. Learned D.P.G. has
also pointed out that clothes of accused which he was wearing at the time of
incident were bloodstained and as per report of chemical expert, same was
stained with human blood. D.P.G. further argued that at the time of arrest of
the accused, he had made extrajudicial confession before PW Ansar and ASI Moula
Bux that he had committed murders due to family dispute. D.P.G. argued that
conduct of the accused at the time of arrest displayed his involvement in the
case and prosecution has proved its case. Learned D.P.G. lastly argued that it
is a fact that real cause of occurrence had remained shrouded in mystery and
opined that it is not the case of extreme penalty. In support of his
contentions, he relied upon the following cases:
1. 1987 SCMR 462
(Muhabbat Ali vs. Ahmed Khan and another)
2. 2007 PCr.LJ 1242
(Desser Mal versus The State)
3. 2015 SCMR 948
(Ghulam Farooq versus the State)
9.
As regards to the unnatural death of
deceased persons, namely, Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi and master Anis
Ahmed, prosecution had examined Dr. Farida Mubeenuddin and Dr. Pardeep Kumar.
During the autopsy, conducted by PW-6 Dr. Farida Mubeenuddin on the dead body
of Mst. Maqsooda Bibi, WMO found the following injures on her body:
1. Lacerated punctured
wound on left forearm about 6 cm in diameter with muscles deep as well as fracture
of forearm been seen (wound of entry and
exit).
2. Lacerated punctured
wound on left side of abdomen with gut protruded outside 7cm x 6cm (wound of
entry) extending upto chest.
3. Lacerated punctured
wound on left firearm 6cm x 5cm with muscles deep.
4. Broken right upper
incisor tooth with corresponding injury on both lips.
5. Bruise near injury
No.1 6cm in diameter.
6.
Bruise below left eye present.
In the opinion of Woman Medical
Officer, all the injuries were ante-mortem and caused with firearm, while cause
of death has been shown hemorrhagic shock leading to cardio pulmonary failure.
10.
During the autopsy, conducted by Dr.
Pardeep Kumar PW-7 on the dead body of Ikhtiar Ahmed, he found (1) firearm
injury 3cm x 2.5cm with invert margin on left upper chest wound of entry. In the
opinion of Medical Officer, injury sustained by Ikhtiar Ahmed was ante-mortem,
while cause of death has been shown as cardio respiratory failure due to acute hemorrhage
shock due to chest injury resulting from firearm weapon. The time between death
and postmortem has been shown 5 to 7 hours and time between injuries and death
instantaneously. Whereas as per opinion of medical officer death of master Anis
Ahmed occurred due to cardio respiratory failure due to acute head injury and
drowning.
11.
Now the question arises, who committed
murders of the deceased persons. PW-1 Ansar Mehmood has deposed that he is
carpenter, incident occurred on 07.05.2009 at 07:00 p.m. At that time, he was
present in his shop, situated at Chappal Building, Block-1, Shereen Jinnah
Colony with one boy Azhar, who was also working as carpenter. At that time,
wife of Azhar came to his shop and informed that one guest has come in the house
of Sufi Bakhtiar (deceased) and they were fighting with each other. In the
meanwhile, above named witness heard fire arm reports. He gave such information
to one SIP Muhammad Younus on his mobile phone. He along with Azhar and other
persons reached at spot and saw accused, he was carrying repeater in his hand,
he was standing inside the room. Accused was not allowing anyone to enter
inside the room. He further stated that at about 08:00 or 08:15 p.m. police
entered the house and unarmed the accused and saw three dead bodies lying in
the house. He acted as mashir of arrest and recoveries. PW-8 SIP Muhammad
Younus has also deposed that on 07.05.2009 he was posted at Boat Basin P.S., he
was on patrolling duty, he received telephonic call from PW Ansar, who informed
him that just opposite to his shop, there is a site office and family of Ikhtiar
Ahmed resides there, there was firing in the house. SIP Muhammad Younus along
with his subordinate staff reached there and saw that accused was standing at
the outer door of site and he was carrying repeater in his hand. Accused was
raising lalkara that no one should come near to him, else he would commit his
murder. Anyhow, accused said that he has committed murder of inmates, police apprehended
him and recovered repeater from him and entered into house and found dead
bodies of Ikhtiar Ahmed, his wife Mst.
Maqsooda Bibi and a kid of 3 months, namely, Anis Ahmed in blue coloured drum
filled with water. SIP Muhammad Younus informed about the incident to high ups.
Through Edhi Ambulance dead bodies were shifted to JPMC. SIP Muhammad Younus
inquired from the accused about the license of the repeater but he failed to
produce it. Accused was arrested, mashirnama of arrest and recovery was
prepared in presence of mashirs. PW-2 SIP Riaz Hussain deposed that he received
call of SHO who informed him that 3 dead bodies were lying near Chappel Resort
and one Wakeel had shot them dead and dead bodies have been shifted to Jinnah
Hospital, he reached to JPMC. After seeking permission from the MLO concerned,
he inspected the dead bodies of Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi and master
Anis Ahmed and prepared three different inquest reports. SIP received cause of
death certificates of the deceased from concerned medical officer. He obtained
the last worn clothes of deceased in sealed condition from MLOs and shifted the
dead bodies to Edhi Cold Storage House and handed over the documents and sealed
parcel of clothes of the deceased persons to SIP Ghulam Farid, the IO of the
case. PW 3 Raja Muhammad Javed deposed that he issued Rahdari certificate for
sending the dead bodies of deceased persons Ikhtiar Ahmed, Maqsooda Bibi and
master Anis Ahmed to one Shabbir Ahmed,
the relative of the deceased persons. PW-4 ASI Moula Bux deposed that on
07.05.2009 he along with ASI Abdul Ghaffar was present in investigation office
of P.S. Boat Basin when ASI Abdul Ghaffar received a telephonic call from SIO
who informed him that a person has committed murder of a male, female and a
child near Chappel Resort. They reached at the spot, arranged Edhi ambulance
and shifted the dead bodies to JPMC. PW-5 SIP Abdul Ghaffar deposed that on
07.05.2009 he was posted at Boat Basin PS, in the evening, he received call of
SHO at 1900 hours and informed that a person has committed murder of male,
female and a child near Chappel Resort, and directed him to reach at the place
of incident. He along with HC Moula Bux reached there, on motorcycle. PWs Azhar
and Ansar were present there, they disclosed that accused Wakeel alias Fouji has
caused murders of three persons being his relatives. They disclosed that the
accused caused murder of male and female by shotgun fires and had thrown small
child in the drum due to which he expired by drowning. Dead bodies were shifted
through Edhi Ambulance to JMPC through HC Moula Bux. SIP Ghulam Fareed seized
the bloodstained clothes worn by accused. PW-8 SIP Muhammad Younus deposed that
on 07.05.2009, he along with subordinate
staff was busy in patrolling duty, when they reached near Chappel Resort,
Block-1, Clifton, at 1900 hours, he received information on phone from one
person, namely, Ansar regarding firing in a house. After receipt of such
information, the police party reached at the place of incident and saw the
present accused at outer door of site, he was carrying a repeater in his hand,
with bloodstained clothes and was moving here and there. It is further stated
that accused issued threat to the police not to come near to him else he would
fire upon them. He further deposed that accused disclosed that he has committed
murder of Ikhtiar Ahmed and his family. Accused was arrested at the spot. After
receipt of information, SHO also reached at the place of occurrence. Police
entered the house and found the dead bodies of Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda
Bibi and master Anis Ahmed. After completing the necessary formalities, all the
three dead bodies were sent to JPMC for conducting postmortem examination and
reports. FIR of the incident was lodged by SIP Muhammad Younus, it was recorded
vide crime No.244/2009 at P.S. Boat Basin under sections 302, PPC. During investigation, bloodstained clothes of the
accused were collected, unlicensed repeater recovered from possession of accused,
two empties and bloodstained earth were sent by the IO to the
chemical/ballistic experts for examination and report. IO collected reports. It
was the entire prosecution evidence. Accused has claimed false implication in
the case.
12.
We have carefully heard the learned counsel
for the parties and perused the evidence minutely.
13.
We have come to the conclusion that
prosecution has proved its case against the appellant for the reasons that PW
Ansar (carpenter), SIP Muhammad Younus and other police officials had no enmity
with the appellant to involve him falsely in this case. PW-1 Ansar Mehmood is
independent witness. Soon after the incident, he reached at spot and saw the
accused from the grill standing inside the room where offence was committed.
His evidence is confidence inspiring and truthful. PW Ansar being not inimical
to the appellant would have no reason to falsely implicate him. Perusal of his
evidence would show that he has narrated the occurrence in its natural sequence
without any exaggeration. Evidence of PW-1 Ansar Mehmood is reproduced as
under:
“This is the
incident of 07.05.2009. At about 07:00 a.m. I was at my shop which is the Shop
No.9, Chapal Building Block 1, Shereen Jinnah Colony, of Carpenting. In the
said shop 1 boy by the name Azhar used to work with me as a Carpenter. At about
07:00 pm his wife Rehana came to my shop and told us that one guest had come in
the house of Sufi Bukhtiar and they were fighting to each other (Sufi kay ghar main mehmaan aaye hoye hain
aur aapas main larr rahay hain). I say that the house of Sufi was an
office/building and used by Sufi as a room being a watchman. I also heard the
commotion and the bullets shots fire. Then from my mobile phone to police SI
Muhammad Younus and informed him about the incident and he replied that the
police is reaching to the scene. Then, I, Azhar and other people proceeded to
the spot, where I saw a bearded man of short height and healthy built and he
was holding a repeater in his hand and he was standing inside the room and I
saw him through the Grills on the Wall. He was not allowing anyone to enter
inside the room on the gunpoint. In the meanwhile the number of policemen also
came to the scene. The policemen also used tear guess to make their entry
inside the room. After so many attempts at about 08:00 / 08:15 pm police
entered in the said house. I was standing outside, police disarmed the accused
with his repeater then I went inside the house and in a room like a hall I saw
the dead body of Sufi Bukhtiar and the dead body of one lady was lying inside
the another room and the dead body of a child at about 6/7 months was lying
inside the Drum. The police secured from the spot the Drum, the blood mark
cloths and repeater and etc. and also arrested the accused. Police prepared
such mashirnama of arrest and recovery and I acted as a mashir. I produce the
same as Ex.05/A, and say it is same, correct and bear my signature. Police also
inspected the place of incident and prepared such memo in my presence. Police
also secured the empties from the place of occurrence and also secured the
bloodstained earth from the spot.”
PW-1 Ansar was
cross-examined at length but nothing favourable to the accused came on record.
14.
Evidence of SIP Muhammad Younus was also
confidence inspiring and reliable. He had deposed as under:
“On
07.05.2009 I was posted as SIP Boat Bain. On the same day I was in the area for
patrolling along with my other staff vide entry No.65. I produce such entry at
Ex.14/A. It was 1900 1900 hours when I received telephone call from SIP Ansar
Mehmood. He informed that there is a site office situated on plot just opposite
to Chapel Resort wherein the said area in the said site office a family
consisting upon Ikhtiyar, his wife and kids were residing. SIP Ansar disclosed
that a firing being taken place in the site office. I and other staff reached
at site office where I saw accused Wakeel standing at the outer door of the
site while armed with repeater. I found that accused Wakeel was raising lalkara
and saying that he has finished and caused murder of all the inmates of the
said house and directed us not to come near him. We by using our official
tactics learned during training succeeded to apprehend him and captured his
Repeater from his hand and having two live cartridges [Kartoos of 12 bore]. I
entered inside the house and found dead body of Ikhtiyar in the hall of said
house, dead body of his wife Masooma Bibi and aside the door there was a drum
of blue colour filled with water wherein the dead body of 03 months kid of
Ikhtiyar and Masooma found drowned position. The said son was namely Anees son
of Ikhtiyar I intimated SHO, DSP and High ups over telephone and called
Ambulances through Edhi and shifted the dead bodies to JPMC Karachi. I demanded
license from accused namely Wakeel @ Makhan for 12 bore repeater two which he
failed. I sealed the repeater at spot and prepared its memo there. At 2000
hours FIR No.244/2009 was registered at P.S. Board Basin.”
PW-8 SIP Muhammad
Younus was cross-examined at length but nothing favourable to accused came on
record. Other witnesses have also fully supported the case of the prosecution,
as discussed above.
15.
Accused in his statement recorded under
section 342, Cr.PC has admitted that he had gone to the house of the deceased at
1600 hours on 07.05.2009 when he found the dead bodies, he came out of the
house. In our considered view, appellant failed to explain for what purpose he
had gone to the house of the deceased persons. As to why he was standing inside
the room with bloodstained clothes, armed with repeater. It is not the defence
theory, that the murders have been committed by the enemies of Ikhtiar or some
dacoits. Recovery of repeater, matched with the empties as per ballistic expert’s
report Ex.9/J. Arrest of appellant at the place of incident connects him with
the commission of offence. Apart from that, at the time of arrest of accused,
his clothes were bloodstained, the same were recovered by the police and were
sent to the chemical expert. Report at Ex.9/K shows that clothes of the accused
were stained with human blood. Report of ballistic expert is also positive.
Delay in dispatch of the repeater and empties to expert would not be fatal to
the prosecution case as there was no suggestion by defence that there was tampering
with the case property. Safe custody of weapon at police station and
transmission to expert have also not been questioned by defence. Medical
evidence is also a corroborative piece of evidence in this case. Trial court
has rightly appreciated the prosecution evidence and held that prosecution has
proved its case. Appellant could not explain his bloodstained clothes wearing at
spot at the time of his arrest. The presence of PW-1 Ansar, at the scene of
occurrence was thus, not unnatural. Appellant was arrested by SIP Muhammad
Younus in presence of PW Ansar within a half an hour of the incident. Such
prompt arrest of accused excluded any chance of false implication. PW Ansar was
independent witness. The evidence of PW Ansar is consistent with the
prosecution case and confidence inspiring. Evidence of PW Ansar receives
corroboration from other pieces of evidence available on record. The appellant
had also made an extrajudicial confession before two witnesses. This shows that
question of appellant’s guilt as well as all the factual allegations leveled by
prosecution are proved. Appellant had failed to substantiate defence plea and
the same was rightly disbelieved by the trial court. In these circumstances, we
do not find any error, factually or legally in the impugned judgment and thus,
conclusion drawn by the trial court with regard to the establishment of the
prosecution case does not call for interference.
16.
From an analysis of the evidence on record,
we are satisfied that all above circumstances enumerated by learned trial judge
in his judgment from which he drew the inference of guilt of Muhammad Wakeel
were satisfactorily established by cogent and convincing evidence and each of
these circumstances in the background of close connection between the parties
tended to incriminate the appellant. We have no hesitation to hold that chain
of circumstances incriminating Muhammad Wakeel is complete and appellant is so
firmly entangled that he cannot come out of the chain. We are satisfied that
appellant had intentionally caused death of Ikhtiar Ahmed, Mst. Maqsooda Bibi
and Master Anis Ahmed. The hypothesis of innocence of appellant and probability
of someone else committing the offence is totally incompatible with the
incriminating circumstances noted above. We do not find any error, factually or
legally, in the impugned judgment and, therefore, trial court has rightly held
that the prosecution has proved its case.
17.
Now the question arises whether trial court
has rightly passed death sentence to appellant and what should be the reply of
confirmation reference made by the trial court under Section 374, Cr.PC. We
have particularly attended to the sentence of death passed against appellant by
the trial court and have noticed in that context that prosecution has failed to
bring on record the motive for
commission of offence. We agree with the proposition that motive is not sin qua
non for the proof of commission of the crime and at time motive is not known to
any other person other than the deceased or the accused person which never
surfaced on record. However, it could not be denied that motive is always very
relevant to determine the quantum of sentence that might be awarded to the
person against whom charge of murder is proved. There is always a motive behind
a commission of any crime. However, the gravity of the offence differs from
offence to offence and from case to case. In any case, motive is always
relevant for the commission of crime. It is “reason” for which an accused
person takes the law into his hands and commits the crime. We are guided by the
principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Ikhtiar
Mehmood and another versus Qaiser Ikhtiar and others (2011 SCMR 1165).
18.
In the presence case, motive is not known,
which is a ground for awarding lesser sentence. Although prosecution has proved
its case against the appellant beyond doubt that he was responsible for the
murders of the deceased persons yet the story of the prosecution has many
inherent obscurities therein. It’s intriguing as to why appellant after
commission of three murders was standing at the spot armed with repeater. We
have, thus entertained no matter of doubt that real cause of occurrence has
been completely suppressed in the case and that the real cause of occurrence had
remained shrouded in mystery. Prosecution has also failed to examine material
witnesses Mst. Rehana, Azhar and investigation officer. The single mitigating
circumstance, available in a particular case, would be sufficient to convert
penalty of death to life imprisonment. As held by the Honourable Supreme Court in
the cases of Haji Muhammad Sadiq vs. Liaquat Ali and others (2014 SCMR 1034)
and Mst. Nazia Anwar vs. the State
and others (2018 SCMR 911). Above mentioned circumstances of this case have put
us to caution in the matter of appellant’s sentence and in the peculiar
circumstances we have come to the conclusion that this is fit case to reduce
the sentence of death to life imprisonment passed against the appellant.
19.
For what has been
discussed above, the death sentence is reduced to imprisonment for life on
three counts. The order passed by Trial Court regarding payment of compensation
by the appellant to the legal heirs of the deceased as well as order regarding
imprisonment in default in payment of compensation are maintained. However, in
case of default of the payment of compensation appellant shall suffer S.I for
six months on each count. Benefit under section 382-B Cr.PC shall be extended
to the appellant. With this modification in the sentence, the appeal is
dismissed. The confirmation Reference No. 05 of 2018 made by the Trial Court is
answered in negative.
Appeal as well as reference are
disposed of in above terms.
J U D G E
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS