1968 P Cr (PLP)

(1) An incised wound 1" on the front of left chest, 3" below the medial third of left clavicle. The wound was transverse in direction and was stitched up. On opening these stitches the dimensions of the wounds were 1" x 1/2" going deep into chest cavity. (2) A linear cut, f x 1/8' just below injury No. 1. (3) An oblique incised wound, 1" x " x ", on the back of right shoulder blade middle part. The wound was stitched up. (4) A linear cut, 1" x 1/8" on the back of right wrist. Injury No. 1 was grievous in nature and all the others were simple. Injuries Nos. 1 and 3 were caused with some sharp-edged stabbing weapon while injuries Nos. 2 and 4 were caused with some sharp-edged weapon. Death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to injury No. 1 which injured the lung and caused haemorrhage in the left pleural cavity. This injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.

5. Allah Rakha P. W. had three injuries on his person. Two of which were with sharp-edged weapon and one with blunt. One was incised, the other was a contusion and the third was a linear cut. Muhammad Anwar P. W. suffered three injuries. Two of which were caused by sharp-edged weapon and one by some sharp-edged pointed weapon. These three injuries were incised wounds.

6. Khair Din accused received six injuries. Two of which were caused by sharp-edged weapon and the others by blunt weapon. Two of the injuries were incised wounds, three were lacerated wounds and one was a contusion mark. Khair Din remained in the hospital from 30th December 1964 till 22nd January 1965. Muhammad Sharif appellant suffered seven injuries. All these injuries were simple and caused with blunt weapon. Six were contusions and one was an abrasion. He was examined on 30th December 1964 at 3-30 p.m. with Abdul Ghani appellant was also examined the same day and two injuries were found on his person. One was incised wound and the other a contused wound. Incised wound was due to sharp-edged weapon while the contused wound was caused with blunt weapon.

7. The appellants when examined denied the prosecution allegations. No evidence was called in defence. Abdul Ghani made the following statement from the dock: - "I sustained the injuries at the hands of Allah Rakha deceased and his companions when I and my brother Sharif went to the well of Dulla Batwal and saw that my father was assaulted and injured by them. While I tried to rescue my father, I received the injuries. On account of our intervention, Khair Din accused was saved from further harm and the deceased along with other assailants ran away to the village."

8. According to the prosecution Allah Rakha deceased had lodged the report Exh. P. R./1 at Police Station Zafarwal on 23rd December 1964, regarding the theft of sugarcane against Muhammad Din and Muhammad Sharif. It is in the evidence of Allah Rakha P. W. that the accused were summoned by the local Police that very day but the police did not proceed against them. This would have hurt the feelings of the deceased and Allah Rakha P. W. and in view of this finding it can be safely spelled out that the complainant were the aggrieved party. We may refer to the evidence of Muhammad Anwar P. W. In cross-examination he stated: - "It is correct that Allah Rakha deceased opened the assault on Khair Din accused and hit him on his head and it was then that Khair Din inflicted a knife blow on the deceased. Allah Rakha deceased hit Khair Din accused with' the blunt side of the kassi. Khair Din accused hit the deceased on his arm." This piece of evidence clearly suggests that the complainant party were the aggressors and the accused acted in the right of self- defence of their persons. Furthermore, we find it in the evidence of Allah Rakha P. W. that Khair Din accused and Muhammad Sharif and Abdul Ghani appellants were working at the well of Dullah Batwal and that the regular Path which connects their village to village Jeoke is at a distance of 1J acres from the well of Dullah Batwal. As such there was no occasion for the complainant party to pass near the well of Dullah Batwal in order to reach village Jeoke. We also find it in the evidence of Nisar Ahmad Sub-Inspector (P. W. 8), that Khair Din accused gave a counter version of the incident wherein he described the complainant as the aggressors. It is in the statement of Nathe Khan P. W. that Khair Din and Abdul Ghani accused were in the hospital at about 8-9 a.m. in injured condition. The subsequent conduct of the accused also weighs heavily against the prosecution version of the incident. The medical evidence also shows that 15 injuries were found on the side of the accused. As against this only ten injuries were found on the person of the deceased and the injured P. Ws. There were also sharp-edged injuries on the person of the accused and the prosecution has failed to give satisfactory account of these injuries

9. The assertion of Allah Rakha P. W. that he snatched a kassi from Muhammad Din and passed it onto Allah Rakha deceased and again got another stick from the spot and gave blows to Muhammad Sharif appellant does not appeal to reason in view of the number of injuries suffered by the accused. In view of this finding and the evidence on the record we have no hesitation in holding that the plea of self-defence raised on behalf of the accused gets support from the prosecution version of the incident of being reasonably true. The number of injuries on the persons of the accused party as compared to the injuries found on the complainant party also shows that the complainant were the first to attack the accused.

10. It is true that most of the injuries on the side of the accused were simple, but the law relating to self-defence makes the accused the judge of his own danger, and permits him to repel the attack, even to the taking of the life. We have to judge the accused by placing ourselves in the same position in which they were placed. It is now well-settled that even if the accused is not able to substantiate his defence plea by producing evidence, yet if his version gets support from the prosecution of being reasonably possible, then the accused is certainly entitled to an acquittal.

11. In the present case we have no doubt in our mind that the complainant and the deceased went to the well of Dullah Batwal with arms and were the first to attack Khair Din accused and as such the accused had reasonable cause to apprehend that at least grievous hurt would otherwise be the consequence of such assault. The case is, therefore, clearly covered by section 100, P. P. C. and the right of private defence extends to the voluntary causing of death of their assailants. In this view of the matter, the appellants are entitled to acquittal. We accord ingly accept their appeal, set aside their convictions and sentences and acquit them. They shall be set at liberty forthwith in case their detention is not necessary in any other case. Appeal accepted.