1973 P Cr (PLP)

Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 15th August 1972. This is a revision application against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, maintaining the con viction of the applicant for an offence under section 338, P. P. C. reducing the sentence to 6 months' R. I. and pay a fine of Rs. 500 or in default to undergo R. I. for 1 month. The applicant was convicted by the Additional City Magistrate. Karachi for an offence under section 338, P. P. C. and sentenced to undergo R. I. for 1 year and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 or in default to undergo R. I. for 3 months. The incident had taken place on 18th December 1967, at about 1 a.m. on M. A. Jinnah Road, previously known as Bunder Road, near the traffic signal. The applicant was driving the vehicle and after crossing the signal dashed against Ramzan Ali aged about 50 years. Ramzan Ali fell down and sustained Injuries. The applicant stopped the car and he was arrested by the traffic constable. First report was lodged and after usual investigation the applicant was challaned. The applicant proclaimed his innocence and-denied that Ramzan Ali was hit by his car. He pleaded ignorance as to the cause of the accident. He was, however, stopped by the traffic constable and the licence was taken from him. Subsequently he was called at the police station. The prosecution examined Ibrahim. Ramzan Ali, Muhammad Afzal, Nizam Ali Khan, Muhammad Ayub Khan Head Constable, Muhammad Ajaib Khan, Dr. Muhammad Ramzan and Fazal Abbas, S. H. O. while the applicant examined Abdul Karim in his defence. On the assessment of the evidence the learned Additional City Magistrate found the applicant guilty of the offence and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 1 year and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 or in default to undergo R. I. for 3 months. Against this conviction and sentence as appeal was filed and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence to 6 months' R. I. and pays a fine of Ra. 500 or In default to undergo R. I. for I month. Consequently the present revision application has been filed. There can be no doubt that the accident had taken place. Apart from the evidence of Ramzan Ali and other witnesses it is borne out by the medical evidence. Ramzan Ali had sustained three injuries and one of those injuries was fracture of the third rib on the right side. So far the identity of the applicant with the crime is con cerned there is the evidence of three witnesses Ramzan Ali, Ibrahim and Muhammad Ayub Head constable. Ramzan Ali stated that he was crossing the road when he was dashed from behind and, therefore, he became unconscious. Ibrahim stated that the car was driven by the applicant at a fast speed and after crossing the signal it dashed against Ramzan Ali. Similarly Muhammad Ayub than stated that Ramzan Ali was crossing the road from zebra crossing when the wagon driven rashly by the applicant bit Ramzan Ali who fell down after sustaining injuries and became unconscious. There it another witness Muhammad Afzal but his attention was attracted when he heard the noise of applying the brakes and found Ramzan Ali having fallen after he was hit by the vehicle. Thin it is clear that the applicant was diving the car negligibility arid he thereby hit Ramzan Ali. It is not the case of the applicant that Ramzan Ali suddenly attempted to cross the road acid was thereby hit by the vehicle. His case is of complete denial. The evidence of the defence witness is unworthy of credence. The trial Court as well as the appellate Court bad believed the evidence of the witnesses and the learned counsel has not succeeded in inducing me to take a contrary view. In the result, I maintain the conviction of the applicant. The learned counsel, however pleaded for the reduction of tire sentence on account of the time taken in the disposal of this case. The incident had taken place in December 1957, the conviction was recorded in October 1969. and the appeal was disposed of in July 1970. So the applicant has been facing these proceedings since about 5 years. If therefore, reduce the sentence of imprisonment to already undergone but maintain the sentence of fine and the sentence in default passed by the learned Additional Session Judge. With this modification the revision application is dismissed. Application dismissed. Sentence reduced.