JUDGMENT MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJUM-UZ-ZAMAN, J.-Appellant was tried by Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No. II, Gujranwala in case F.I.R. No. 566/2002, dated 1.10.2002 for the offence under Sections 302/392/511, PPC read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 registered at Police Station, Hajipura, Sialkot. The Trial Court vide judgment dated 26.8.2003 convicted the appellant under Section 7(a) of the ibid Act alongwith Section 302(b), PPC and sentenced him to death. The appellant was also directed to pay Rs. 100,000/- as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased, or in default whereof to undergo six months Sh Appellant was also Convicted under Section 511, PPC and sentenced to five years with the benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment, appellant has filed Crl. Appeal No. 454-J of 2003 whereas the Trial Court has also made a reference (M.R. 28-T/2003) seeking confirmation of death sentence awarded to the appellant. Both these matters are being disposed of together by this single judgment.
3. While arguing the case, learned counsel for the appellant brought to our notice that during the trial no proper legal aid was available to the appellant and the important aspect of the case that on the day of occurrence appellant was admitted in D.H.Q. Hospital, Sialkot in an injured condition by the Investigating Officer of this case namely Rashid Majeed, SI, was not brought to the notice of the Trial Court and has this important aspect of the case been brought into the notice of the Trial Court the complexion/result of the case would have been different, In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed on record certified copy of the medico legal report qua the appellant as well as the notes prepared by the doctor who had examined the appellant on 1.10.2002 (day of occurrence).
4. After going through the record as well as hearing the learned counsel for the parties at some length, we feel that the evidence brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the appellant should have been brought on the record by the Trial Court but unfortunately this information was never laid before the Court at the relevant time, In the larger interest of justice, we are persuaded to remand the case to the Trial Court with the observation that the Trial Court shall record the statements of the concerned doctors as Court witnesses who had examined the appellant on 1.10.2002 (day of occurrence), prepare the medico legal report as well as the notes and if so required to re-examine Rashid Majeed, Sl/investigating Officer of the case or any other witness necessary for the just decision of the case and thereafter to decide the matter afresh after bringing on record fresh statement of the appellant under Section 342, Cr.P.C., his defence evidence is produced and hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
In the light of the said observation, the impugned judgment is set aside with the direction to the Trial Court to proceed with the matter expeditiously and decide the matter within sixty days. During this period appellant shall be treated as under. Trial prisoner.
Resultantly death sentence awarded to the appellant is not confirmed and murder reference i.e. M.R. No. 2S-T of 2003 is answered in the negative.