1. ' MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAMUZ-ZAMAN, J.---Appellants Iftikhar Ali, Ali Muhammad sons of Muhammad Amir, Arshad lqbal son of Muhammad Abbas and Haji Bashir son of Muhammad A,mir, along with Sher Ali son of Ali Muhammad were tried by Additional Sessions Judge, Okara in case F.I.R. No, 305 of 1996: dated 13-8-1996 under sections 302/324/452/ 148/149 read with section 109, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Chuchak, who vide judgment dated 12-5-1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-- ' Iftikhar Ali Convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced him to death as well as to pay compensation amounting to Rs,25,000 to the legal hers of the deceased Nawab Bibi as required under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Or in default whereof to undergo six months' imprisonment.
2. ' Ali Muhammad Convicted under section 452, P.P.C. And sentenced him to four years' R.I. And to pay fine of Rs,5,000 or in default whereof to undergo one year's R.I. Under section 337-A(I), P. P. C. He was Sentenced to six months' R.I. As Taazir and to Rs,5,000 as Daman to Fayyaz Hussain injured P.W., or in default of payment of Daman he was ordered to be kept in jail till the payment of the same. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently with the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
3. ' Arshad Iqbal Under section 337- L(ii), P.P.C. He wassentenced to six months' R.I. And to pay Rs,5,000 as Daman to Jamshaid Hussain injured P.W. Or in default of payment of Daman he was ordered to be kept in jail till the payment of the same. Under section 452, P. P.C . He was sentenced to four years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default whereof to undergo one year R.I. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also extended to him.
4. ' Haji Bashir Ahmad ' He was convicted under section 337-F(v), P.P.C. And sentenced to two years' R.I. And to pay Rs,10,000 as Daman to injured Jamshaid.
5. ' Challenging their conviction and sentence all the appellants filed the instant appeal while complainant filed Criminal Revision No,209 of 1999 seeking enhancement of sentence of Ali Muhammad, Haji Bashir Ahmad and Arshad Iqbal respondents. A reference i.e, Murder Reference No,230 of 1999 was also made by the trial Court seeking confirmation of death sentence of Iftikhar Ali.
2. Prosecution case as narrated in the F.I.R. Exh.P.J. Is that accused All Muhammad had suspicion that Ittifaq Hussain brother of complainant Fayyaz Hussain has illicit relations with his daughter Mst.
6. Nasreen. On 12-8-1996 Ittifaq Hussain was abused by Ali Muhammad when he was passing through the street, who in retaliation also abused, whereupon Ali Muhammad gave a Sota blow on his head. On 13-8-1996 at about 8 a.m. Complainant Fayyaz Hussain was sitting in the courtyard of his house along with his brothers Jamshaid and Ittifaq Hussain and his mother Nawab Bibi and were discussing about sending Ittifaq Hussain to the Hospital for treatment. In the meantime accused Arshad armed with Sota, Ali Muhammad armed with hatchet, Sher Ali armed with 7-MM rifle, Iftikhar Ali armed with .12 bore single barrel gun and Haji Bashir Ahmed armed with .12 bore double barrel gun emerged there and accused Ali Muhammad raised Lalkara that Ittifaq Hussain be apprehended and put to death. Accused Arshad gave a Sota blow on Jamshaid Hussain hitting on the back side of his chest. He gave another blow with his Sota on the right wrist of Jamshaid Hussain. Then accused Ali Muhammad gave a blow with the reverse side of his hatchet on the head of the complainant. Accused Iftikhar Ali, Bashir Ahmed and Sher Ahmad made fires in the air with their respective fire-arms. On the alarm, P.Ws. Niaz Ahmad P.W.12, Noor Ahmad (given up) also reached the spot and saw the occurrence. On seeing them the accused Ali Sher etc. Fled away along with their respective weapons. When the complainant and his brothers Jamshaid Hussain, Ittifaq Hussain, Noor Ahmad, Niaz Ahmed P.Ws. And Nawab Bibi were going towards the hospital and reached near the sugarcane crop of Noor Ahmed P.W. (given up), the accused Ali Muhammad etc., came there from the backside. At that time the accused Sher Ali was armed with 7-MM rifle, Bashir armed with Sota and accused Ali Muhammad was armed with hatchet. The accused Iftikhar made a fire with his gun from the backside hitting on the left flank of Nawab Bibi who fell down on the ground. The accused Bashir Ahmed made a fire with his gun landing on backside of left shoulder of Jamshaid Hussain P. W.11. The complainant and Noor Ahmed P.W. (given up) picked upon Nawab Bibi to take her home and when they reached near the house of Maqbool Ahmed maternal uncle of Fayyaz Hussain, she succumbed to the injuries. The accused fled away with their respective weapons.
7. ' After complying with legal formalities challan was submitted before the trial Court. Where prosecution produced fifteen witnesses to prove the charge against the appellants which include Fayyaz Hussain P.W.9, Ittefaq Hussain P.W.10, Jamshaid Hussain P.W.1 and Niaz Ahmed P.W.12, the eye-witnesses of this occurrence.
8. ' Learned trial Court also examined appellants and their co-accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. Ali Muhammad appellant while answering to the question "Why the P.Ws. Have deposed against you and why this case has been made against you?", replied as under:- ' "The complainant party and I reside in an abadi known as abadi Bhattian and reside close to each other. One day prior to the occurrence there was a quarrel between my son Asfand Yar and Ittefaq P.W. Due to tethering of cattle under the shade of a Bashir (sic) three which is situated near our house. During this quarrel hot words were exchanged between Ittefaq P.W. And my son Asfand Yar and my son gave a Soti blow to Ittefaq P.W. They were separted by the residents of Abadi.
9. Thereafter this incident was narrated by Ittefaq P.W. In an aggravated form and by distorting the real facts to his brothers and other family members. On 13-8-1996 at about 8-00 a.m. I along with my wife Mst. Perveen was going to my shop situated in the main village Abadi of Mitha Bhatti. When we reached near the house of Shaukat Ali Bhatti all of a sudden Fayyaz Hussain, Ittefaq and Jamshaid P.Ws. Along with Faryad (P.W. Given up) armed with a gun, hatchets and Sota attacked and injured my wife Mst. Perveen and myself. Both of us received serious injuries on head and other parts of bodies with hatchets and Dangs. Fayyaz Hussain P.W. Was carrying a .12 bore gun with him.
10. On hearing the alarm my brother Iftikhar accused was also attracted to the spot who had a licensed .12 bore gun with him. Mst. Nawab Bibi deceased also reached the spot in the meantime.
11. Fayyaz Hussain P.W. Fired at Iftikhar with his .12 bore gun from near the wall of Shaukat Ali Bhatti but the fire did not hit him. He was going to make another fire and Iftikhar in order to save his own life and the lives of my wife Mst. Parveen and myself fired with his gun as a result of which Mst. Nawab Bibi got a pellet injury and Jamshaid P.W. Also received injury with the same fire. No occurrence had taken place in the house of Mst. Nawab Bibi. The so-called injuries with blunt weapon to Jamshaid Hussain was the result of fall while the so-called injury on the person of Fayyaz Hussain with blunt weapon had been manoeuvred with friendly hand. The P.Ws. Are closely related inter se and they have deposed falsely to prove their false case".
12. ' The other appellants adopted the same defence plea.
13. ' Learned trial Court after appraisal of evidence vide judgment dated 12-5-1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as narrated earlier.
3. During the pendency of this appeal, Iftikhar Ali appellant died on 14-5-2003 and on the intimation of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Bench, vide judgment dated 14-4-2004, to his extent this appeal has already been disposed of as stands abated and murder reference has been answered in the negative. With regard to Bashir Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant does not press this appeal as the appellant has already served out his sentence. To his extent this appeal stands dismissed as not pressed. About Ali Muhammad and Arshad Iqbal (appellants) learned counsel for the appellants submits that they have already undergone major portion of their sentence, none of them caused any injury to the deceased nor caused any fatal injury to the prosecution witnesses and in the circumstances, a lenient view qua the quantum of their sentence be taken. Conversely learned counsel for the complainant while opposing the appeal submits that sentence awarded to respondents (i.e, Criminal Revision No,309 of 1999) be enhanced.
14. ' After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we have observed that allegedly at the time of occurrence, Ali Muhammad appellant was armed with hatchet whereas Arshad Iqbal appellant was armed with Sota but none of them caused any injury to the deceased and they were convicted by the trial Court on the charges of house trespass and causing injuries to the prosecution witnesses i.e, Fayyaz Hussain P.W.9 and Jamshaid Hussain P.W.12. Allegedly Ali Muhammad appellant and. Caused injury to Fayyaz Hussain P.W.9 on the head whereas Arshad Iqbal appellant gave Sota blow to Jamshaid P.W.11 on the right arm near the elbow, The Medico- legal reports of both the said witnesses reveals that injuries caused to them by the said appellants were simple in nature.
15. ' All the said eye-witnesses while deposing before the trial Court have supported the prosecution case. The participation of All Muhammad and Arshad Iqbal appellants in this occurrence stands established from the statements of these witnesses. The ocular account also finds upport/corroboration from the medico- legal report. The nature, location and duration of injuries as narrated by the eyewitnesses stand affirmed by the medical evidence. The evidence of these witnesses is persuasive in nature and the same can safely be relied upon to uphold the conviction of Ali Muhammad and Arshad Iqbal appellants.
16. ' As far quantum of sentence of Ali Muhammad and Arshad Iqbal is concerned, we have observed that they are facing the agony of this case 1996 and according to the record they have served out substantive portion of their sentences of imprisonment. Keeping in view the role attributed to these appellants and the agony of the case they have gone through, we are persuaded to take a lenient view qua the sentences of c imprisonment of these appellants. Accordingly while dismissing this appeal, their sentence of imprisonment on both the charges is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, they shall pay Rs,10,000 each (rupees ten thousand) as Daman instead of Rs,5,000 as fixed by the trial Court. The said amount shall be deposited by them within thirty days from today with the learned Sessions Judge concerned. Both Fayyaz Hussain (P.W.9) and Jamshaid Hussain (P.W.11) would be at liberty to withdraw the said amount under the proper orders of the learned Sessions Judge. In case the amount of Daman is not deposited as directed, both the appellants shall be taken into custody as required under the law. With this modification, this appeal otherwise stands dismissed.
4. For the foregoing reasons, Criminal Revision (Criminal Revision No,309 of 1999) also stands dismissed.