2000 PLP 1675 (SCMR)

SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.

Baz Muhammad, appellant along with his co-accused Taj Muhammad was tried for an offence under sections 324/337(F)(i)/34, P.P.C., for making murderous assault on Noor Muhammad and his brother Muhammad Anwar and causing injuries with dagger. The learned trial Court found the appellant guilty for the said offence and sentenced him to 7 years' R.I. and Rs.4,00,000 as Arsh to be paid to injured Muhammad Anwar. The appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence, filed an appeal before the learned Balochistan High Court. The learned High Court maintained the conviction and sentence of the appellant, Baz Muhammad and dismissed his appeal vide its judgment, dated 2-1-1997. Hence this appeal. This Court, while granting leave to appeal, observed as under:-- "Mr. Muhammad Ishaque, learned counsel for the petitioner, did not challenge the conviction and the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner, but disputed the amount of Arsh awarded against him and payable to injured Muhammad Anwar, on the ground that the amount of Arsh had not been worked out in accordance with provisions of section 323 of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance." On this point, we have heard Mr. Muhammad Munir Peracha, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Khan Tanooli, learned Advocate-General, Balochistan. According to P.W. Dr. Shabbir Ahmed who had examined the injured Muhammad Anwar at casualty Department, he had noted the injuries on the person of Muhammad Anwar as follows:-- "(1) Already stitched wound on left side back of chest just near to lumbar, still bleeding. (2) Heamotema on base of right little ringer. (3) Already stitched wound on left arm, just near to elbow lateral still bleeding. (4) Loss of sense of lower body, patient complains of numbness of both lower limbs (loss of movement)." According to the certificate issued by the doctor, the patient was admitted in Male Neuro-surgery Ward and was discharged on 26-11-1995. It has come in the evidence that after receipt of injuries, the lower portion of the patient had paralysed and he was not able to pursue his ordinary course A of life. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and permanent paralysation, the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court has imposed Arsh of Rs.4,00,

000. It would be advantageous to reproduce section 337-R which reads as follows:-- "337-R. Arsh of organs in pairs,-The Arsh for causing Itlaf of organs found in a human body in .pairs shall be equivalent to the value of Diyat and if Itlaf is caused to one of such organs the amount of Arsh shall be one-half of the Diyat: Provided that, where the Victim has only one such organ or his other organ is missing or has already become incapcitated the Arsh for causing itlaf of the existing or capable organs shall be equal to the value of Diyat. " Keeping in view the incapacitation of the injured, the learned Courts below have imposed the Arsh of Rs.4,00,

000. The appellant has agitated that the conviction of amount of Rs.4,00,000 as Arsh to be paid by him is not in accordance with the provisions of section 323, P.P.C. as amended. We have also considered and perused that in view of the complete paralysation of lower portion of the body of the injured, the Arsh of Rs.4,00,000 has properly been calculated and awarded. We find no illegality or infirmity with the order passed by the Courts below. M.B.A./B-22/5 Appeal dismissed.