HARRIES,C.J. - (1.) THE appellant in this case was tried by a learned Additional Sessions Judge sitting with a jury upon two charges of murder. The jury found the appellant guilty on both the charges by a majority. Five of the jurors found the appellant guilty under Section 302, Penal Code, on both the charges: two found the appellant guilty not under Section 302, Penal Code, but under Section 304 on both the charges, whereas the remaining two jurors found the appellant not guilty on both the charges. The learned Additional Sessions Judge accepted the majority verdict of guilty under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentenced the appellant to transportation for life in respect of the charge of murdering one Golam Hossain. He did not think it was necessary to sentence the appellant in respect of the other charge of murder upon which the jury by a majority had found the appellant guilty.
(2.) THE case for the prosecution was that the appellant had murdered two persons, namely, Golam Hossain and Safatunnessa Bibi by shooting them early in the morning of 1 -6 -1948. The case was that the appellant fired one shot which killed both these persons and the appellant was charged in separate counts in respect of the death of each of them. The appellant Md. Illias was the son of a deceased brother of one Khosnobi who was the complainant in the case. The appellant, Khosnobi and other co -sharers lived in separate rooms in a homestead which was surrounded by a compound wall. It was the case for the prosecution that there was considerable ill -feeling between the appellant and Khosnobi and there was undoubtedly litigation proceeding over the properties which were held joint. On the morning of 1 -6 -1948, there was, it is said, an altercation between the appellant and Khosnobi over the question of fishing in an ejmali tank which belonged to them and the other co -sharers. The appellant had hired two fishermen to catch fish in the tank; but it was suggested that nothing should be done until all the co -sharers in the tank had been consulted. The appellant said that that was unnecessary and asked Khosnobi to go with him to the tank to see the fish being caught. Khosnobi, it is said, refused to go and the appellant flew into a rage and declared that he would teach Khosnobi a lesson and exterminate his family. The appellant is said to have entered his room and later persons tried to pacify him. The case for the prosecution is that the appellant eventually fired a gun from his room and hit Golam Hossain and Safatunnessa Bibi who were standing outside. Both fell to the ground and died. It is said that one Abdul Sukur went up to the window through which the appellant had fired his gun and advised him to run away. The appellant eventually came out of the room and made good his escape. Khosnobi at once ran to a Police outpost, which was about half a mile away and gave information of the occurrence to one Jamuna Prosad Sukul, the Head Constable, who was stationed at the outpost. The Head Constable telephoned to the Metiaburuz Police Station. Later the Officer -in -charge of Metiaburuz Police Station took up the investigation and the appellant was found and arrested in the house of one Jamsed Ali in a village nearby. Investigation took place and in due course the appellant was committed to stand his trial in the Court of Session, where he was convicted and sentenced as I have indicated.
(3.) IT is most unfortunate that considerable delay has occurred in bringing this appeal for hearing, but that delay was unavoidable. Certain documents were in such condition that it was extremely difficult to translate them and all sorts of attempts were made to have these documents translated. They were eventually translated as far as they could be translated and the matter has now come before us.;