1992 P Cr (PLP)

(b) Penal Code (XLY of 1860)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 324/34‑‑‑Sentence, quantum of‑‑‑Occurrence took place in year 1982‑‑‑ Accused were sent thrice to jail during trial and also remained in jail for about 3 weeks after their conviction‑‑‑Agony of protracted trial coupled with imprisonment suffered by accused would meet the case‑‑Sentence of 3 years' R.I. was reduced to one already undergone in circumstances. Nemo for Petitioners. Taswar Amin for the State. Date of hearing 1st April, 1991. I propose to dispose of Criminal Revision No.396 of 1984 filed by Muhammad Din and Nazir Ahmad, and Criminal Revision 417 of 1984 filed by Niaz Ahmad, petitioners, through this single judgment.

2. Muhammad Din. Nazir Ahmad. Muhammad Saddique and Niaz Ahmad, petitioners, were tried under section 324/325, P.P.C. for causing injuries to Shahid Pervaiz, complainant, on 10‑5‑1982. The prosecution case was that the petitioners restrain Shahid Pervaiz when he was going to his house after performing his duties in the Kohi Noor Mills. Muhammad Saddique gave Chhurri blow on his right hand. Nazir Ahmad and Muhammad Din, petitioners, gave fist blows on his person. The occurrence was seen by Speen Gul, P.W.2, and Habib Ahmad P.W.3,

3. On the conclusion of the trial, the petitioners were convicted under sections 325, P.P.C. and 324, P.P.C. and sentenced to two years' R.I. under section 325/34, P.P.C. and to six months' R.I. under section 324/34, P.P.C. On appeal to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad set aside the conviction under section 325, P.P.C. but maintained their conviction under section 324, P.P.C. No one has appeared for the petitioner. Since the revision after having been admitted cannot be dismissed for non‑prosecution, so I have examined the case with the assistance of the learned counsel for the State. I find that eye‑witnesses Speen Gul P.W.2. and Habib Ahmad, P.W.3, have fully supported Shahid Pervaiz, complainant. They claimed to have seen Niaz Ahmad catching hold of the injured witness and the petitioners namely Muhammad Din and Nazir giving him injuries with fists. The medical evidence supports the injuries on the person of the complainant. I do not see any legal infirmity in the conviction of the petitioner under section 324/34, P.P.C.

4. This brings me to the question of sentence. I find that the occurrence took place in the year 1982. The petitioners were sent to Jail thrice. After the rejection of their appeal they remained in Jail for more than three weeks when they were released on bail by this Court in this revision. Muhammad Din, co‑accused, who allegedly had given Chhurri blow to the complainant has been acquitted. In these circumstances, I feel that the agony of protracted trial coupled with the imprisonment suffered by the petitioners as under trial prisoner and as convict would meet the case. Disposed of accordingly. SA./M‑3007/L Order accordingly.