P L D 2003 Lahore 275 (PLP)

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondents/accused got registered a case F.I.R No.53 of 1998 under sections 302/324/148/149. P.P.C at Police Station Takhat Mahal, regarding occurrence in which Muhammad Yousaf and others received injuries, as a result of which Muhammad Yousuf died. The case was registered against complainant party and after usual investigation they were challaned. However, the version of the complainant party was rejected, therefor, they filed private complaint against the respondents. The case of complainant/petitioner is that respondents while armed with different weapons caused injuries on the persons of P.Ws. According to complainant Nazar Muhammad fired at Muhammad Hussain, whereas Manzoor, Sharif and Abdur Rehman fired at 'Khan Muhammad. Muhammad Aslam and Nek Muhammad caused injuries to Muhammad Hussain, etc. The fire of Nazar Muhammad accused hit their companion Muhammad Yousuf and lie died, therefore, case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C., was registered against Muhammad Hussain, etc. After recording preliminary evidence learned trial Court summoned the respondents to face trial vide order dated 26‑8‑2000.

3. The accused appeared before trial Court and charge under sections 324/337/148/149, P.P.C., was framed against them to which the pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, whereupon evidence was recorded. The complainant examined P.W.1, Dr. Afzal Ahmad Bashir, P.W3 Muhammad Hussain. P.W.4 Khan Muhammad, P.W.5 Muhammad Hassan alias Noor Hassan and he himself appeared as P.W.2 in support of his complaint.

4. The complainant while appearing as P.W.2 stated that about 4 years back at about 3‑30 a.m. he alongwith others were coming back from Mela Peer Shah and when they reached graveyard Peer Shah, Muhammad Sharif, etc. accused while armed with pistol, gun .12 bore, hatchet and stick emerged from Sarkanda bushes and caused injuries on their persons. Nazar Muhammad fired at Muhammad Hussain P. W. whereas Manzoor Ahmad anti Abdur Rehman fired at Muhammad Khan P.W. which hit him on his right hand and right thigh. The remaining accused gave stick blows to Muhammad Hussain and Noor Hassan alias Muhammad Hassain. The fire of Nazar Muhammad accused hit Muhammad Yousuf, companion of the accused party who was seriously injured and later on succumbed to his injuries. The complainant party was empty‑handed at the relevant time. He took the injured persons to Police Station Takhat Mahal and narrated the occurrence whereupon a police constable took the injured persons to D.H.Q. Hospital, Bahawalnagar for their treatment. However, Local Police did not register case on his request as accused party had got registered case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 under sections 302/148/149, P.P.C. against P.Ws., therefore, he filet complaint against the accused. During cross‑examination he stated that Muhammad Hussain and Muhammad Hassan P.Ws. are his first cousins and Khan Muhammad is his real uncle. He admitted that Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Hassan, Muhammad Mazhar and Khan Muhammad are accused in the cross‑murder case (F.I.R. No.53 of 1998). He also admitted that his sister Mst.Zohra Bibi is wife of Muhammad Hussain and that Riaz Ahmad and Fayyaz Ahmad accused in the said murder case are his cousins. Tile complainant statFd that all the Investigating Officers in the murder case found the version of accused to be false and they declared the accused of' murder case to be aggressors. He (complainant) did not receive any injury during the incident. They did not cause injuries to the accused party. He denied that P.Ws. Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Hassan armed with rifles, Khan Muhammad armed with gun .12 bore, Mazhar armed with hatchet, Fayyaz Ahmad and Riaz Ahmad armed with sticks launched attack. on the accused persons including Muhammad Yar while they were coming back from 'Mela Peer Shah'. He also denied that a man from accused party namely Muhammad Yousuf son of Goma was murdered while Muhammad Sharif, Nek Muhammad and Nazar Muhammad were injured at the hands of complainant party. The complainant also denied that he and other P.Ws. were not present at the time of occurrence. P.W.3 Muhammad Hussain, P.W.4 Khan Muhammad and P.W.5 Muhammad Hassan also made similar statements.

5. The accused/respondents were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein they denied the allegations leveled against them by the prosecution and pleaded their innocence. Bashir Ahmad accused/respondent stated that:‑‑ "I am innocent. In fact, the real facts are that on 12‑4‑1998 at about 3‑00 or 3‑30 a.m. when I alongwith Muhammad Yousuf deceased and others were coming after seeing Mela of Peer Shah to our Bheni, Muhammad Hassan, Muhammad Hussain, Khan Muhammad, Mazhar, Riaz Ahmad and Fayyaz Ahmad duly armed with fire‑arms, hatchet and Sotis, launched an attack on us under a pre‑planned scheme in order to take the revenge of a dispute of a canal water which took place few days prior to the occurrence as a result of which Muhammad Yousuf was murdered and myself, Nek Muhammad and Nazar Muhammad were seriously injured, while defending ourselves minor blunt weapon injuries were caused by us to the assailants. Nazar Muhammad injured P.W. on the arrival of the police at the place of occurrence got recorded his statement regarding the above said occurrence on the basis of which case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. was registered at Police Station Thakhat Mahal and after completion of the investigation all the Investigating Officers rejected the above said version of the complainant Manzoor Ahmad and challaned Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Hassan alias Noor Hassan, Khan Muhammad, Mazhar, Fayyaz Ahmad and Riaz Ahmad as the real culprits under sections 302/324/148/149 P.P.C., and they are facing trial and the date in that case is also fixed for today. In fact the instant complaint has been filed bye the complainant Manzoor Ahmad Just as a counter‑blast and in order to save their own skin in the above said murder case against them. " The remaining accused also made similar statements. After hearing the parties learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused/respondents vide judgment dated 28‑1‑2002. Hence, this Petition for Special Leave to Appeal.

6. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.

7. The case of petitioner/complainant is that respondents while armed with different weapons caused injuries on the persons of P.Ws. and on hearing their alarm Khan Muhammad, Muhammad Shafi, Said Muhammad and Mohib Ali reached the spot and that Manzoor and Abdul Rehman fired at Khan: Muhammad which hit him on his right hand and right thigh. Also that Mohammad Sharif accused fired with his pistol at Khan Muhammad P. W. whereas Muhammad Aslam and Nek Muhammad caused injuries on his head and right elbow and remaining accused gave Soti blows to Muhammad Hussain and Noor Hassan. During this occurrence the fire of Nazar Muhammad accused hit their own companion; Muhammad Yousuf who later on died. The complainant took the injured to the police station and reported the matter and police got them medically examined. However, Muhammad Yousuf succumbed to his injuries, therefore, police registered case F.I.R., No.53 of 1998 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C., against them and no case was registered on the application of complainant, therefore, he was constrained to file private complaint. After hearing the patties, learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the. respondents. The case of complainant is that during occurrence accused/respondents caused injuries on the persons of P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5 but medical officer (P.W.1 Dr. Afzal Ahmad Bashir) admitted during cross‑examination that injuries on their persons could be inflicted by friendly hand. It makes prosecution story doubtful. P.W.4, Khan Muhammad stated that he reached the place of occurrence when fight was over. It shows that respondents had not caused injuries on his person. The perusal of impugned judgment shows that learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that "the plea of the complainant party that they were subjected to aggression by the accused party at the time of occurrence had been elaborately discussed in cross‑murder case and disbelieved by the Court on the premises that P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5 alongwith their companions had come to the spot duly armed with their weapons and assaulted other party which resulted into the murder of Muhammad Yousuf son of Goman as well as causing injuries to the P.Ws. and that keeping in view various contradictions, discrepancies and infirmities in the testimony of P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5, it transpired that statements of said P. Ws. stand shattered. Also that it, was worthy of note, that it was not clear from the complaint as well as testimony of P.Ws. that who specifically caused injuries on the persons of P.Ws. and there was general allegation of causing blows to P. Ws and that since P. W .3, P. W .4 and P. W .5 are accused in the cross‑murder case, therefore, it seems that present complaint had been filed as counter‑blast to pressurize the accused party". Even otherwise statements of P.Ws. are not convincing and confidence ?inspiring. Admittedly, there is murder case against complainant party. In these circumstances, I find that complainant has failed to prove his case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt. The conclusions drawn and reasons advanced by learned Additional Sessions Judge show fair evaluation of evidence which is in accordance with settled principles in criminal cases. Learned‑ counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any misreading or non‑reading of evidence. The impugned judgment is not perverse or capricious. It is a well‑reasoned judgment, therefore, there is no justification to set aside the same.

8. The upshot of the above discussion is that this Petition for Special Leave to Appeal has no force and same is accordingly dismissed. N.H.Q./M‑1673/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.