1977 P Cr (PLP)

2. The brief facts of the; case are as under: Mst. Eid Bibi aged 18 years Mst. Hamid Bibi aged 17 years were two pathan girls who lived in katchi abadi near Grain Elevator at Lyallpur. Both the appellants were running building material shops in front of their houses. These two girls lived alongwith their parents and other relatives. According to the case of prosecution both the appellants used to tease these girls Mst. Eid Bibi and Mst. Hamid Bibi and wanted to develop illicit intimacy with them. The girls did not approve this attitude of the appellants and apprised Asmat Khan their brother about the same who made a complaint to the father of Shabbir appellant, who expressed his helplessness as according to him his son Shabbir, being a vagabond, was out of his control. On 8‑11‑1974 the P. Ws. Mat. Eid Bibi, Mst. Hamid Bibi arid Mst. Ghani Khela alongwith their brother Asmat Khan went to Kathery Bazar to make some purchases Beside making purchases, they had also in their mind to get themselves photographed at some shop near 'Zailgarh'. When the party reached near its destination, Shabbir Ahmed and Mohammad Anwar appeared on the scene. Shabbir Ahmed appellant was stated to be holding a jug containing acid in it and at the instigation of Mohammad Anwar appellant he threw this chemical on the person of Mst. Eid Bibi and Hamid Bibi, as a result of which the faces and bodies of both the girls suffered serious burns. After the acid was thrown by Shabbir both the appellants made good their escape.

3. The doctor Abdul Haleem, Medical Officer, District Headquarters Hospital, Lyallpur examined the injured P. Ws. Mst. Eid Bibi and Mst. Hamid Bibi and found 7 and 4 injuries respectively on their bodies. The medical examination vide Exh. P. C. and P. D. disclosed that the injuries were caused by acid. In the opinion of the doctor injuries Nos. 3 and 4 on the person of Mst. Hamid Bibi and Injury No, 1 on the person of Mst. Eid Bibi were found grievous in nature. It was further stated by him that due to injury No. 1 the face of Mst. Eid Bibi stood permanently disfigured. After registering the case the Sub‑Inspector recorded the statement of Asmat Khan Exh. P. A. and took into possession the clothes of the injured P. Ws. vide memo Exh. P. B. to prepared site plan Exh. P. G. recorded the statement of injured P. Ws. and arrested the accused. Formal F. I. R. Exh. R. A/I was registered at the Police Station by Mohammad Yaqub Moharrir Head Constable. Although Ghani Khela P. w. was given up as unnecessary yet the prosecution produced Asmat Khan P. W.

1. Hamid Bibi P. W. 2, Eid Bibi P. W. 3, Akhtar Janan P. W. 4, Muhammad Zaman P. W. 5, Dr. Abul Haleem P. W. 6, and Khushi Mohammad A. S. I. P. W. 8 in the Court against the appellants. The appellants while appearing before the trial Magistrate, made their statements under section 342, Cr. P. C. at the conclusion of their trial Shabbir Ahmed while professing his innocence stated as under: ‑ "I am innocent. I have been implicated in this case due to enmity. I used to forbid these girls as they indulge in fornication. Moreover Alia one of the relations of the girls had fought with Muhammad Anwar the other co‑accused. Therefore he was implicated due to his friendship with Muhammad Anwar. Muhammad Anwar in his statement under secution 312, Cr. P. C. professed his innocence and attributed it to enmity, due to his quarrel with Alia and others who were relations of the complainant party. The appellants produced Hail Mukhtar Ahmad E. W. 1, Sajjad Akhtar D. W. 2, Feroze Din Constable No. 84 D. W. 3, Aurangzeb D. W. 4 and Bashir Ahmad D. W. 5 in their defence." I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of 'he appellants as well as learned counsel for the State and have perused the record of this case carefully with their assistance. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Muhammad Anwar has submitted that the case of Muhammad Anwar was distinguishable from the case of Shabbir Ahmed on the following grounds: ‑‑ (i) Akhtar Janan P. W. 4 who being a real brother of injured P. Ws. exhonerated Muhammad Anwar of the part attributed to him and made it further clear by deposing that it was only Shabbir who had committed this offence. The learned counsel pointed out that the statement of this witness was not challenged by the prosecution as he was not declared hostile. (ii) That Muhammad Zaman P. W. 5 accepted in his cross‑examination that Mst. Hamid Bibi his daughter had made complaint about the behaviour of Shabbir appellant only and did not name Muhammad Anwar as one of the persons who used to tease her. (iii) That D. W. 3 Feroze Din constable No. 84 an independent witness brought Exh. D. A. dated 5‑7‑1973 on tire record by which Muhammad Anwar had lodged a complaint against Alia relation of the complainant party and Mst. Hamid Bibi had accepted in his cross‑examination that Alia was a truck driver as well as owner of a truck and was related to her. She also admitted that 4/5 months prior to the occurrence Alia and Muhammad Anwar had an altercation between them. By pointing out these facts of the case the learned counsel submitted that possibility of Muhammad Anwar being falsely impli cated in this case could not be excluded as the F. I. R. was lodged at 3 p m. while the occurrence is alleged to have taken place at 9‑45 a.m. He has also drawn my attention to the F. I. R. where the place of occurrence is mentioned to be situated at a distance of 2 furlongs from the Police Station. Before I deal with the case of Shabbir Ahmed I will like to give my finding regarding the contentions raised by the learned counsel on behalf of Muhammad Anwar appellant. While going through the statement of Akhtar Janan P. W. 4 who is a mature young man of 25 years of age as well ass real brother of injured witnesses, I find that he has categorically stated that it was Shabbir appellant only who was carrying the jug and had thrown the acid on Mst. Eid Bibi and Mst. Hamid Bibi. If the prosecution was not satisfied with his statement it should have cross‑examined this witness to shove that he was either making a false statement or was showing undue favour to Muhammad Anwar. This failure on the part of the prosecution would certainly entitle Muhammad Anwar appellant to take benefit of the statement of this witness who cannot be dubbed as a person who had same motive to oblige Muhammad Anwar. The contention of the defence counsel is further supported by the statement of Muhammad Zaman father of the injured

13. Ws. who bas also stated in his cross‑examination that no complaint was made to him regarding the conduct of Muhammad Anwar towards his daughter, and it was only Shabbir Ahmed about whom Mst, Hamid Bibi his daughter had made grievance that he was all the time pestering her. The stand of Muhammad Anwar that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to bad blood with Alia one of the relations of the complainant party is further strengthened from the statement of Mst. Hamid Bibi P. W. 2 who has also admitted that Muhammad Anwar and Alia bad strained relations. This appellant has further substantiated his claim of enmity with Alia by placing documentary evidence on the record through Feroze Din Constable No. 84 of Police Post Rail Bazar Lyallpur. With this evidence in his favour Muhammad Anwar is well within his right to urge that the case against him was trumped up due to enmity with Alia a close relation of the complainant party. Taking into consideration the inimical background of P. Ws. the delay in lodging the F. I. R. assumes significance viz‑a‑viz the case of Muhammad Anwar appellant. The learned trial Court, it seems, has nut been able to appreciate these inherent infirmities, with which the case of prosecution suffers, as far as Muhammad Anwar appellant is concerned.

3. In the light of above, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has faded to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt against Muhammad Anwar appellant. The result is that I accept his appeal and acquit him.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shabbir Ahmed appellant has laid lot of stress on the delay in lodging the F, I. R. and has tried to make out that in fact this occurrence took place somewhere else than the alleged place of occurrence and some unknown persons have causes they damage to these two P. Ws. Mst. Eid Bibi and Mst. Hamid Bibi. In support of this premises he has submitted that the failure of Asmat Khan to accom pany his two injured sisters to the hospital led to a strong inference that he was not present at the time of occurrence and similarly the conduct of Mohammad Zaman the father of these girls in not reporting the matter to the police himself and leaving this matter to Asmat Khan, duly proves that he was not informed about this occurrence as alleged by Asmat Khan. The learned counsel contended that above‑mentioned unnatural phenomenon would render the testimony of both these witnesses highly doubtful and this no reliance should have been placed by the trial Court on their statements. He also laid great emphasis on the inter se relationship of thane witnesses and urged that it was never safe to rely on the evidence of such quality, in matter of conviction under such a serious charge. The learned counsel for the appellant has further relied on confrontations extracted from these injured P. Ws. regarding the motive attributed to Shabbir Ahmed, These confrontations relate to their statements made before the police under section 161, Cr. P. C. where they have failed to mention that Mst. Hamid Bibi had told her father regarding the earlier conduct of Shabbir Ahmed appellant and that same was brought to the notice of appellant's father. The learned counsel by pointing out these confrontations has argued that the motive attributed to the appellant Shabbir was nothing but an improve, meat on the part of the P. W.s son as to make their case look more impressive against him. I have given my anxious thought to all these contentions raised by the learned counsel on behalf of Shabbir appellant and find that there was nothing on the record to show that complainant party had any personal axes to grind against this appellant. There is no denial of that fact that in the statement under section 161, Cr. P. C. before the police, the story regarding the bringing of appellant's misbehaviour to the notice of his father, earlier to this incident, does not find mention. Absence of this allegation can be termed as omission and cannot be given the status of contradiction. It will be necessary to point out that the statements under section 161, Cr. P. C. before the police have never been treated as substantive piece of evidence and therefore undue importance cannot be attached to such omission, as pointed out by the defence. Under the law it is the statement of P. Ws. before the trial Court (which is open to cross‑examination by an accused person), which forms basis either for his conviction or acquit tal. A sanctity is attached to these statements as these are made before a Magistrate and are duly read over to the witnesses who have stood the test of cross‑examination. While going through the statement before the trial Court of all the P. Ws. I find that they have stated with one voice that Shabbir Ahmed had an evil eye upon these girls and wanted to develop illicit intimacy with them but as he found their attitude hostile towards him therefore like a revengeful and frustrated person, he decided to destroy that very object, which was difficult for him to achieve. There is no denial of the fact that all the witnesses are related inter se but unless and until it is brought on the record that these witnesses were motivated by some animus or rancour, a mere relationship Inter se will not make their testimony as unreliable. I have perused the evidence of these witnesses with care and caution and find that it inspires confidence viz-a‑viz Shabbir Ahmed appellant. The very fact that Akhtar Janan P. W. 4 did not implicate Mohammad Anwar in this case, speaks volumes about his truthfulness. If this witness was tutored one he would not have spared Muhammad Anwar co‑accused in this case. These witnesses have stood the test of lengthy cross‑examination but nothing has been brought on the record in favour of Shabbir Ahmad appellant to make the case doubtful against him. The defence taken by the learned counsel on his behalf is not only unimpressive but can be readily termed as preposterous. If somebody had made this dastardly attack on these two young girls, they would not have substituted him with the present appellant, when according to his own stand, he never went after these two girls and gave them a cause of complaint. As regards the defence produced by Shabbir Ahmad, I have no hesitation to hold that it does not advance his case in any manner whatsoever. The statement of D. Ws. are of negative type and they are the persons, who did not appear before the police and only at a belated stage came forward to depose in favour of the appellant and that too in half‑hearted manner. As regards the minor discrepancies in the statements of P. Ws regarding exact location of occurrence it is sufficient to say that these discrepancies only occur when the witnesses are truthful and have entered the witness‑box without any previous coaching. Regarding the delay there is an Explanation on the record that when the matter was reported to the police for registration of this case the complainant party was asked first to get the injured witnesses medically examined and then to report the matter. In this regard it is pertinent to note that the injured were admitted in the hospital at 10 30 a. m. He almost immediately after the occurrence. Therefore it cannot be said that the complainant party has acted with deliberate delay to get the injured medically examined. If the medical examination was conducted at 3‑00 p. m. by the doctor this was an act beyond the control of the complainant party as this delay was caused by the medical officer for reasons best known to himself. May be he thought it proper to first give the benefit of medical aid to the injured as the burns on their persons were of quite serious nature. The duration of the injures given by the doctor fully coincide with the time of occurrence therefore the delay in conducting medical examination would not come the rescue of defence in this cage, J am in complete agreement with the learned trial Court that Shabbir Ahmed stood fully connected with the commission of this crime. Similarly I do not find that the punishment awarded to this appellant was in any way excessive. The appellant has acted in most cruel manner and had disfigured the face of a young girl, permanently. In these circumstances the case of appellant hardly deserves lenient treatment. The result is I dismiss the appeal of Shabbir Ahmad appellant as being without any merits and uphold the conviction as well as sentences visited upon him by the learned trial Court. Order accordingly.