1994 P Cr (PLP)

Under section 342/34, P.P.C. 3 months' R.I. each. (2) Under section 323/34, P.P.C. Fine Rs.500 each. in default of payment of fine to undergo one month's imprisonment each.

2. Briefly the prosecution case is that Muhammad Boota P.W.4 lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 against the petitioners on 30-12-1987 with the allegation that the petitioners Muhammad Tufail empty-handed, Mushtaq and Parvaiz Anjum armed with hockeys and Muhammad Tufail petitioner caught hold of Muhammad Boota P.W.4 Mushtaq and Parvaiz Anjum caused injuries with their hockeys on the fore-arm, wrist, arm and back. Noor Muhammad P.W.1 and Muhammad Anwar P.W.3 reached and rescued the complainant. Motive behind the occurrence is that P.W.4 Boota complainant was married with Mst. Aisha daughter of Muhammad Tufail petitioner and she was divorced. Due to that grievance the petitioners had made murderous assault on Muhammad Boota P.W.4 and also kept him in illegal confinement.

3. The petitioners were challaned and sent up for trial. Charge under sections 323/34, P.P.C. and 342/34, P.P.C. was framed against the petitioners to which they denied and claimed trial.

4. The prosecution had examined 7 P.Ws. in all to substantiate its case. Noor Muhammad P.W.1 had stated that he witnessed the petitioner Muhammad Tufail empty-handed, Mushtaq and Parvaiz Anjum armed with hockeys. Muhammad Tufail petitioner caught hold of P.W.4 Muhammad Boota complainant from his neck whereas the co-accused had caused hockey blows to P.W.4. The petitioners lifted Muhammad Boota P.W.4 and took him to their village. P.W.2 Muhammad Siddiq had witnessed the recovery of hockey P.1 at the instance of petitioner Pervaiz Anjum which was secured by Khadim Hussain, A.S.I. (P.W.VI) vide memo. ExH.P.A. attested by him and Abdur Rauf, Muhammad Siddiq P.W.2 also witnessed the recovery of hockey P.2 at the instance of Mushtaq petitioner which was secured by Khadim Hussain A.3.I. (P.W.VI) vide memo. Exh.P.B. attested by him and P.W.3 Muhammad Anwar gave the ocular account and corroborated the statement of P,W.1. ?P.W.4 the complainant narrated the facts mentioned by him in F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 that Muhammad Tufail petitioner had caught hold of the complainant from his neck whereas Mushtaq and Pervaiz Anjum petitioners gave hockey blows on his wrist, arm and back. The P.Ws. intervened but the petitioners lifted him and confined him. P.W.5 Munir Ahmad M.H.C. had drafted the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 on the receipt of statement Exh.P.C. P.W.6 Khadim Hussain, A.S.I. had drafted the complaint on the statement of P.W.4 and sent the same to the police station for registration of a case. P.W.7 Dr. Muhammad Ajmal had medically examined P.W.4 and had found two swollen (1) left arm and back side of elbow. (2) On the front side of the right hand and a cut mark. The injuries were caused with blunt weapon and simple in nature. M.L.R. issued by him is Exh.P.D.

5. The petitioners when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution evidence against them and produced D.Ws. Muhammad Aslam and Abdul Ghaffar who had stated innocence of the petitioners.

6. The petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the trial Court vide its judgment, dated 14-4-1990. Vide criminal appeal the case was remanded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide its judgment, dated 20-9-1990, and again the petitioners' statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. were recorded as directed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14-11-1990. The petitioners were found guilty by the trial Court vide its judgment, dated 12-12-1990. The petitioners filed criminal appeal against their conviction and sentence which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 19-9-1992.

7. Heard. Record perused. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has not seriously challenged the conviction and sentence of the petitioners and has prayed for leniency in the matter of sentence. The case was registered against the petitioners on 30-12-1987 and the petitioners were arrested on 6-1-1988. The petitioners were at first convicted and sentenced by the trial Court on 14-4-1990 but the case was remanded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 20-9-1990. Whereafter recording statements of the petitioners under section 342, Cr.P.C. the petitioners were again convicted and sentenced by the trial Court on 12-12-1990. Criminal appeal by the petitioners was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Toba Tek Singh on 19-9-1992. The petitioners' sentence was suspended by this Court on 28-9-1992. The petitioners remained in jail as under-trial and convict for a period of 15 days in all. The petitioners are facing agony of the trial since 1987 and in the circumstances I am of the considered view that the period already undergone by the petitioners as under-trial and convict: shall meet the ends of justice. However, the sentence of fine of Rs.500 each under section 323/34. P.P.C. is maintained and the same shall be deposited by them in the trial Court within three weeks in default of payment of fine to suffer one month's S.I. each. The petitioners are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged. N.H.Q./M-1447/L?????? Sentence reduced.