1969L3075 (PLP)

(3) His blood pressure is 152/85 which is about within normal limits. (4) There was a murmur on the left side of the chest over the region of the heart, as heard by the stethoscope. (5) The urine was passed and tested in my presence and in the presence of the Pathologist of this hospital. The report of the Pathologist is as follows :‑ Sugar‑‑‑ ‑2.5 % It is also added that the urine was passed twice and examined twice in my presence at an interval of about half an hour. The report of the Pathologist is attached in original. (6) The X‑ray of the chest was taken in my presence and in the presence of the Radiologist and the Radiologist's report is as follows :‑‑ Lung

‑‑Clear Heart shadow‑Normal. (1) Sugar was detected in the urine, suggesting that he is suffering from diabetes. (2) There is a murmur in the heart. Whether or not it is congenital and whether or not it has any significance on his health, I cannot say, there being no B. C. G. arrangement in this hospital." In the course of hearing on 2nd of October 1968, Mr. Munir Ahmad, Advocate, on behalf of the accused, stated that his client would surrender himself for medical examination by the Medical Board at Mayo Hospital, Lahore, within a fortnight, whereupon by my order of even date, the Medical Superintendent of Mayo Hospital, Lahore, was asked to make necessary arrangement for the examination of the accused by a medical expert. The Medical Superintendent asked Professor Muhammad Akhtar Khan, Visiting Physician, Medical Unit No. I, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, to examine Wazir Ahmad Chughtai. His report dated the 6th October 1968, reads as follows "(1) He complains of dyaphoea on exertion and palpitation for the last 6 or 7 months. (2) Pain in the left side of the chest, which radiates to the left shoulder. The pain comes as an attack which high may come at any time either on exertion or even at rest, each attack of pain lasting for 2 to 4 minute. (3) Pains in knee and ankle‑joints both sides since 5 to 6 months. (4) The patient also reports that he is known diabetic for the last one year. (5) Patient also reports that his blood pressure was reported to be 175/95 about 8 months ago. Physical Examination He is middle‑aged well‑built healthy‑looking person. General examination reveals no abnormality. Blood pressure 190/95. Pulse rate 110 mm. Pansystelic (sic) murmur accompanied by a thrill palpable in the fourth intercastal (sic) space near tile sternum. No Positive findings found in any other system. He has been advised the following investigations: (1) X‑rays of the chest. (2) E. C. G. (3) Glucose tolerance test. (4) Urine Examination. (5) Blood for Mb. T. L. C. and D. L. G. This is a preliminary report about this case. Final report will be ready when these tests are done."

9. From the report datailed above, it is obvious that the accused was asked to appear again before the medical expert, but he did not turn up. The final report of the Doctor dated the 29th October 1968, is as follows :‑ (1) Ex‑ray of the chest is within normal limits. (2) E. C. G. is also normal except raised heart rate which could be due to excitement or other cause. (3) His routine blood examination shows no abnormality. (4) The results of urine and glucose tolerance are inconsistent with each other. The Clinical Pathologist has advised that both these examinations should tae repeated. The results in general and particularly of the urine and glucose (blood sugar) are doubtful. Therefore, no final report on the health of the person can be given unless and until he report) again for re‑examination and for repeating laboratory tests."

10. It would be seen that the accused is in the habit of playing hide‑and‑seek. On one occasion he was successful in obtaining the order of bail from this Court by fraud and misrepresentation of facts. His conduct has teen exposed in the explanation of Doctor Muhijtar Ahmad Chishti, M. R. C. P., Assistant Professor of Medicine, Nishtar Medical College, Multan, which reads (2) The petitioner's statement in his bail application that he `was taken to hospital in police custody' is absolutely false as the person brought before me for examination was not accompanied by aby police escort. The actual position is explained in detail in the following paragraphs. (3) On 10th July 1968, at about 8 a.m. when the Ward Registrar, Dr. Ishfaq Khan, was also with me, one Mr. Umar Khan, previously E. D. C., Nishtar Hospital and now E. D. C. Highways Multan, came to me with some documents which were marked to me by the Administrator, Nishtar Medical College, Multan. These papers disclosed that the High Court of West Pakistan had directed that a person named Wazir Ahmad son of Bahawal Khan caste Chughtai of D. G. Khan accused of murder under section 302, P. P. C. should be got examined by a Heart Specialist of this Hospital. The case was referred by the Administrator, Nishtar Hospital, to Professor Ahmed Ali in the first instance on 9th July 1968. (4) Mr. Umar Khan while showing these documents to me stated that the person to be examined .was sitting in the adjacent room. I looked into the papers and saw the man whom he wanted to be examined. There were no identification marks in the documents which could help me in linking that man with the accused person mentioned in the documents the said person was also not hand‑cuffed or escorted by police. This fact is testified by the Registrar of the Ward in his statement dated 3‑8‑1968 of which an attested copy is attached herewith. This created a doubt in my mind about the identity of that person. It will be appreciated that in all cases referred to members of the medical profession they have to be quite sure about the identity of the person to be examined, particularly when he is accused of murder. I, therefore, did not examine that person due to absence of police escort and for want of identification marks. It was thus absolutely in good faith and in most conscientious discharge of duty that I returned the papers to the Administrator with the remarks that the identification marks of the accused were not on record in the documents produced before me. (5) I may respectfully submit that there was absolutely no intention on my part to evade the examination or in any way to disobey the orders of the honourable High Court. As already explained above my inability to examine the person was based purely on a genuine apprehension about the correct identity of the man, as he had been brought to me by a third person and not by the police, although the case was that of murder. (6) Before I conclude it seems pertinent to invite your kind attention to a letter dated 4‑7‑1968 (copy enclosed) addressed to you by one Zahir Ahmad Suri of 101/Block No. I, D. G. Khan, of which copies were end used by you to me and to Professor Ahmed Ali and Dr. M. Moazzam Elahi with your No. 9413‑15/NXC dated the 3rd August 1968. In this letter the writer has, inter alia, alleged that the accused Wazir Ahmad Chughtai with the connivance of the D. G. Khan Police, was trying to get the desired certificate by substituting some one else in his place"

11. From the explanation of Doctor Mukhtar Ahmad Chishti detailed above, it is obvious that the accused did not surrender for medical examination and was successful in securing bail from this Court. Again it was after much difficulty that he agreed to surrender himself at Lahore, but finding himself in difficult situation he chose not to appear.

12. I have examined the reports of the medical experts carefully and it can be said with certainty that the accused is not a sick and infirm person.

13. The result is that the order dated the 30th of July 1968, of my learned brother Doctor Nasim Hasan Shah, J., is hereby recalled. The accused is present in Court and has been ordered to be taken in custody. Bail order recalled.