2018 PLP 58 (YLRN)

SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.

The petitioner's application for constitution of special medical board for reexamination of injuries of Ahmad Nawaz (respondent No.4) was dismissed by the learned judicial magistrate, Bhakkar on 12.1.2016, whereafter he filed a revision petition against the said order. which also met the same fate, as may be found from order dated 25.1.2016, made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhakkar. He has challenged validity of both the orders through this petition under article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973.

2. The relevant facts behind this petition are that respondent Ahmad Nawaz got case FIR No.2/16, dated 3.1.2016, under section 337F(v)/34 P.P.C., registered at police station Saray Mahajar, district Bhakkar against Abdul Rasheed (petitioner) and others with the allegation that they being armed with dandas/sotas trespassed on his dera at 4.30 p.m. on 8.12.2015 where they uprooted a couple of plants/trees, threw his son Junaid Ahmad on the ground and dealt a danda blow to his left hand, which caused dislocation of a finger. He was medically examined the same day and his medico-legal report showed a blunt weapon injury at the same locale, which, after necessary, investigation, was declared Ghayr-Jaffah-Hashimah (337-F(v), P.P.C.). The petitioner's application for constitution of the special medical board and the revision petition against the order of the learned magistrate were dismissed one after the other by the courts concerned. Hence, the instant petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned orders have been passed in aloof of the rules on the subject and petitioner's plea has been thrown away by the learned courts below without proper application of the judicious mind; the respondent-Ahmad Nawaz did not allege in the FIR that his finger had been broken and he only referred to dislocation thereof, which factum is not supported by the medical evidence, as his medico-legal report showed fracture of second metacarpal bone of left hand; the petitioner moved the application for constitution of special medical board for reexamination of the respondent's injury before the learned area magistrate twenty-seven (27) days after the issuance of the first medico-legal report of the complainant, but only seven days after the declaration of nature of his solitary injury, hence, it might not have been considered the time-barred; the revision petition filed by the petitioner was dealt with equal degree of injudiciousness by the learned sessions court through the impugned order, which may be held as illegal as the order of the learned magistrate.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the relevant record, it is observed that the petitioner ought to have moved the application for constitution of special medical board within three weeks from the date of initial medical examination of the injured Ahmad Nawaz (respondent No.4) as envisaged by Notification No.SO(H&D)6-1/90, of the Health Department issued on 12.2.1990. The argument of the learned counsel that the nature of the respondent's injury had been declared on 28.12.2015, so the petitioner well observed the time-limit as fixed by the Health Department's notification, when he moved an application before the learned judicial magistrate for constitution of the special medical board for reexamination of his sole injury, is without any substance, for, the learned counsel rejected the story of FIR by arguing that the occurrence narrated therein had not taken place at all. If it was so, what difference would it have made, if nature of the said injury as entailed in the medico-legal report. had been kept under observation and declared on 28.12.2015. The petitioner should have felt himself time-hound, before he applied to the learned judicial magistrate for constitution of the D.S.M.B. It certainly created a weakness in his case, when he did not abide by the restriction of the time-limit. There is another notification (No.SO(H&D)6-1/90, dated 8.2.1992) on the subject, which may not be relevant to the facts of this case.

5. The respondent-injured, merely by an estimation, alleged in the FIR that he found his finger dislocated after having been given a dandy blow by the accused. It did not mean that he clinically knew as to what damage had internally been done by the said injury. The medical officer found affected part of left hand of the injured swollen at the time of his medical examination and he kept this injury under observation, to be declared by the radiologist on the strength of X-rays etc. the record reveals that it was the radiologist of Civil Hospital Sargodha who detected fracture of second metacharpal bone of left hand of the injured when he scanned the X-rays etc. and on his report, the first medico-legal officer declared the nature of injury Ghayr-Jaifah-Hashimah (337-F(v), P.P.C.) There can hardly be found any foul-play in the entire exercise. The special medical board for re-examination of an injured person cannot be ordred to be constituted whimsically or gratuitously and this is what the learned courts below cared for, while passing the impugned orders. the submissions made by the learned counsel are too scanty and feeble to hold this petition sustainable. Dismissed in limine. WA/A-41/L Petition dismissed.