2006 PLP 772 (YLR)

MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM?-UZ-ZAMAN, J.

This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No.1726 of 2001 filed - by Ahmad Hussan, Farooq Ahmad and Aziz Ullah, Criminal Appeal No.1582 of 2001 filed by Shafa Ullah and Muhammad Hanif against their conviction, Criminal Appeal No. 1622 of 2001 filed by Muhammad Hanif against the acquittal of respondent, Criminal Revision No.754 of 2001 filed by Muhammad Hanif and Criminal Revision No.784 of 2001 filed by Ahmed Hassan and others. Seeking enhancement of sentence of the respondents.

2. On 16-9-1999 upon the statement of one Ahmad Hassan case F.I.R. No.303 of 1999 was registered at Police Station Kallurkot stating therein that complainant along with Aziz Ullah and Farooq was going back to his house when they reached near the tubewell of Rana Taj Muhammad suddenly Aman Ullah and Ehsan Ullah armed with double barrel gun. Shafaullah. Muhammad Hanif armed with Waholas intercepted them. Amanullah while raising Lalkara made fire at Farooq (brother of the complainant) which did not hit him but his second fire hit Ahmad Hassan (complainant) on the left foot. Statedly, when Aman Ullah tried to repeat the fire complainant held the barrel of the gun. The fire went off without hitting anybody and he (complainant) snatched the gun from Aman Ullah. Thereafter. Shafaullah accused gave Wahola blow to Aziz Ullah P.W. on the head and left arm near the wrist. Muhammad Hanif caused Wahola blow to Farooq which hit him on the left arm near the wrist. He also gave Wahola blow from the wrong side on the head and back of complainant. Allegedly, Ehsan Ullah also made ineffective firing from his gun. Subsequently Aman Ullah died in the hospital on 24-9-1999 and another case F.I.R. No.320 of 1999 about the same occurrence was registered on the statement of said Muhammad Hanif accused. The complainant (Muhammad Hanif) stated that on the same day i.e. 16-9-1999 at about evening time he along with Aman Ullah (deceased), Shafa Ullah and other P.Ws. was going towards the Dera of Hayat Ullah in connection with some domestic affairs and when they reached near the tubewell of Raja Taj Muhammad, accused Ahmad Hassan armed with Wahola, Farooq and Aziz Ullah armed with Sotas and Ghulam Abbas intercepted them. Ahmad Hassan after raising Lalkara caused injuries from the wrong side of Wahola on the nose, cheek and back of complainant. Farooq caused two Sota blows to Aman Ullah which hit on his back and left shoulder. Ahmad Hassan inflicted Wahola blow on Aman Ullali hitting on right side of his head, Aziz Ullah caused three Sota blows to Shafa Ullah on the head, back and chest. Ghulam Abbas raised Lalkaras that if anybody would come near he would be done to death. Motive for the occurrence as narrated was that about 4/5 days prior to the occurrence there was a quarrel between the parties and in order to wreck the vengeances the accused had launched attack and caused injuries. Both these matters were tried simultaneously and vide judgment dated 29-6-2001 learned Sessions Judge while acquitting Ghulam Abbas and Ehsan Ullah convicted and sentenced the accused of both cases as under: State v. Ahmad Hassan and others (case F.I.R. No.320 of 1999). Ahmed Hassan appellant Convicted under section 302(b)/34, P.P.C. and sentenced to fourteen years' R.I. as well as directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs.50,000 to the legal heirs of Aman Ullah deceased as required under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or in default whereof to further undergo one year's S.I. Farooq Ahmad appellant Convicted under section 337-L(ii)134, P.P.C., and sentenced to two years' R.I. as well as held liable to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,00O for causing injuries to Aman Ullah deceased. Aziz Ullah appellant Convicted under section 337- L(ii)134, P.P.C. and sentenced to two years' R.I. and held liable to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,000 Under section 337-L(iii) P.P.C., convicted and sentenced to five years' R.I. and held liable to pay Arsh i.e. 1/10th share of Diyat. State versus Ehsan Ullah (case F.I R. No.303 of 199~J. Shifaullah appellant Convicted under section 337- A(i)/34, P.P.C. and sentenced to two years' R.I. and held liable to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,

000. Under section 337-L(ii)/34 P.P.C. convicted and sentenced to two years' R.I. and held liable to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,

000. Muhammad Convicted under section 337- Banff appellant A(ii)134, P.P.C. and sentenced to five years' R.I. and held liable to pay Arsh 5% of Diyat. Under section 337-L(ii)l34, P.P.C. convicted and sentenced to two years' R.I. and held liable to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10.000 All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended in favour of appellant in both the cases. record reveals that none of the parties had come with clean hands and had deliberately concealed the true facts. The witnesses in both the cases while deposing before the trial Court had not explained the injuries received by the opposite party at their hands. From the data available on record it is also difficult to find out the reasons which ignitioned the whole affair and the genesis of the crime is shrouded in mystery. The findings of the Investigating Officer namely Abdul Sattar during the investigation was that it was a case of free fight between the parties in which both sides had used weapons and caused injuries to their adversaries. In the circumstances of this case the trial Court has rightly observed that neither of the party had waylaid each other and it was an open fight which took place near their place of residences. In this view of the matter the trial Court while keeping in view the role of each accused has rightly convicted them.

6. As far quantum of sentences of the appellant is concerned, we are of the view that while awarding sentence, the trial Court has taken a little bit harsh view. Except the injuries on the person of Aman Ullah (deceased), all the injuries on the person of witnesses in both the cases were not of serious in nature or dangerous to human life. Similarly, the appellants are facing the agony of this case for the last more than five years and according to the record except Ahmad Hassan rest of the appellants have also already undergone substantial portion of their sentence. In this view of the matter, while dismissing the appeals, sentences of imprisonment of the appellants except Ahmad Hassan appellant are reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, they shall pay Daman and Arsh as fixed by the Court within six months else they will be taken into custody as required under the law.

7. As far Ahmad Hassan appellant is concerned, his sentence on the charge under section 302(c)/34, P.P.C. is reduced to imprisonment for ten years with the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. He shall also pay compensation amounting to Rs.50,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased as required under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or in default whereof to undergo further six months' S.I. The conviction and sentence of appellant? under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C. is maintained. However, all the sentences of appellant shall run concurrently. His appeal also stands dismissed.

8. For the reasons narrated above Criminal Appeal No.1726 of 2001 against acquittal of respondents, Criminal Revision No.754 of 2001 tiled by Muhammad Hanif seeking enhancement of sentence of Ahmad Hassan and others and Criminal Revision No.784 of 2001 filed by Ahmad Hassan seeking enhancement of sentence of Shifaullah and others stand dismissed. H.B.T./A-676/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.