IN THE HIGH
COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Cr. Jail
Appeal No.D-41 of 2007
Cr.
Reference No.D-26 of 2007
PRESENT
Mr.
Justice Khawaja Naveed
Ahmed,
Mr.
Justice Ghulam Dastgir A. Shahani,
Appellants Zahid Hussain Jalbani and Nawab Panhwar through Mr.Nisar
Ahmed G Abro, advocate.
Respondent The State
through Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed
Abbasi, Asst. Advocate General.
Date
of hearing : 23.4.2008. Date of Judgment : 23.4.2008.
J U D G M E
N T.
KHAWAJA NAVEED AHMED, J.-
This appeal has been filed by appellants Zahid
Hussain and Nawaz, who have
been convicted vide judgment, dated 27.04.2007, by the learned II-Additional
Sessions Judge, Larkana, for offence under Sections
302, 34, P.P.C, and sentenced to death, as Tazir.
2. Since it was a jail appeal, we have
appointed Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro
as advocate for pauper appellants to defend them on State expenses. The accused/appellants have caused injuries
to deceased Arbab Ali on 27.4.1991 at about 8.30
a.m., in the land of Ghulam Rasool
Unar situated in Taluka Dokri, who had died due to following injuries:-
“External injuries:-
1. Incised wound 12 c.m x 8 c.m x neck deep over the
left side of the neck.
2. Incised wound 12 c.m x 4 c.m over the back of
lower part of the buttock region x muscle deep.
Internal injuries:-
Cranium: Healthy.
Spinal Cord: Fracture of 3rd
and 4th cerebral vertebrae.
Abdomen: Healthy.
Stomach contains
semi solid food. Large intestine contains gases and fasces matter.
All other organs: Healthy.”
3. Zahid Hussain son of Allan Jalbani is
the main accused, who has been charged with causing fatal injuries to the
victim. Charge was framed by the trial
Court on both the accused, which is reproduced as under :-
CHARGE
I, Ghulam Nauman Shaikh, Sessions Judge, Larkana, do hereby charge you:
1)
Zahid Hussain s/o Allan, Jalbani, &
2)
Nawaz Ali s/o Arbab Ali, Panhwar,
as follows:-
That you on or about 27th day of
April, 1991 at about 8.30 a.m in the land of Ghulam Rasool Unar
near Watercourse situated in deh Gujhar,
Taluka Dokri, in furtherance
of your common intention, intentionally caused death of deceased Arbab Ali by inflicting hatchet injuries to him and thereby
you committed Qatle-amd punishable u/s 302 r/w
section 34, P.P.C as amended by Ordinance, 1991 and within cognizance of this
Court;
And I hereby direct that you be tried by
this Court on the aforesaid charge.
Dated this 10th
day of December, 1991.
Sd/-10.12.1991.
Sessions Judge, Larkana”.
4. The learned Counsel for the appellants
has stated that name of appellant Nawaz is not
mentioned in the F.I.R and he has been mentioned as an unknown person. Injuries have been attributed to him
also. The learned Counsel states that
injury attributed to the unknown person has been caused on the non-vital part
of the body. Both the accused in their
statement under Section 342, Cr.P.C, have denied the
commission of the offence. Appellant Zahid Hussain in his 342, Cr.P.C
statement has denied having produced hatchet hidden by him beneath debris from
his house. The learned Counsel has further
stated that the witnesses examined by the prosecution are related and
interested persons. However, appellant Zahid Hussain has not examined
himself on oath. He has not produced any
witness in his defence. Same is the position regarding appellant Nawaz. He has denied
to have produced the hatchet from the heap of brick near the
5. We have perused the judgment passed by
the learned trial Court. The reasons
given by the learned trial Court for convicting the appellants and awarding
them the sentence, are convincing. The learned Judge has awarded death sentence
to both the accused persons.
6. Learned Asst. A. G., Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Abbasi has
supported the conviction. However, he
says that in the circumstances of the case, the capital punishment to both the
appellants will be harsh. He states that
interest of justice will be served if the conviction of both the appellants is
maintained and their sentence is reduced to imprisonment for life with benefit
of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
7. We have gone through the evidence, so
also perused the impugned judgment and we are in agreement with learned Asst.
A. G., that sentence of both the appellants may be reduced to imprisonment for
life. The impugned judgment does not
show any compensation imposed against the appellants in terms of Section 544-A,
Cr.P.C, which the trial Court ought to have awarded
to the legal heirs of deceased.
Therefore, the appellants are further ordered to pay compensation of
Rs.100,000/= each, which if recovered, shall be given
to the legal heirs of the deceased under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. In case compensation is not paid, the
appellants will have to serve further simple imprisonment for one year
each. The appellants shall be given
benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
8. With this modification/reduction in
sentence, Crl. Jail Appeal No.D-41/2007 is
dismissed. Crl.
Reference No.D-26/2007 is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE
JUDGE