' ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHRY, J.~ Through this consolidated judgment, I intend to dispose of Crl. Revision No,440 of 2007 filed by Ahmad Khan, Abdur Rehman and Zia-ul-Haq petitioners against their conviction and sentence, Crl. Appeal No,886 of 2007 filed by Allah Yar appellant against the acquittal of Haji Muhammad Muwaz respondent and also Crl. Misc No, 1635 of 2007 filed by Allah Yar complainant for enhancement of sentence awarded to Ahmed Khan, Abdur Rehman and Zia- ul-Haq respondents, jointly as all these matters have arisen from the judgment dated 5-1-2007 passed byNAME UNDER SECTION Sentence Ahmad Khan 337-A ( the learned Judicial Magistrate Section 30, Khushab whereby the petitioners in Crl.
Revision No,440 of 2007 were convicted and sentenced as under:- NAME UNDER SECTIONSentence Ahmad Khan337-A (ii), P.P.C.4 years' R.I. with arsh Rs.9,495.3 Abdul Rehman337-F (iii), P.P.C.2-1/2 years' R.I. with Daman Rs.15000 337-F (iv), P.P.C.3 1/2 years' R.I. with Daman Rs.25000 Zia Ul Haq 337-F (iii), P.P.C.2 years' R.I. with Daman Rs. 10,000 337-F (i), P.P.C.6 months' R.I. with Daman Rs.5000 ' Haji Muhammad Muwaz respondent in Crl. Appeal No, 886 of 2007 was also convicted under section 337-A (ii), P.P.C. And sentence to 4 years' R.I. As Taz'ir along with direction for payment of Rs,9495.3 as Arsh to Fateh Sher injured. Benefit, of 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to them. However, through the same judgment respondents in Crl. Misc. No, 1635-M of 2007 were acquitted of the charge by the learned trial Court while extending benefit of doubt to them and also the judgment dated 5-6-2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab whereby an appeal filed by the petitioners and Haji Muhammad Muwaz accused against their conviction and sentence was dismissed to the extent of the petitioners while the same was allowed to the extent of Haji Muhammad Muwaz co-accused and he was acquitted of the charge while extending benefit of doubt to him.
2. Briefly the facts narrated in the F.I.R. (Exh.PA) are that on the day of occurrence at about 4-00 p.m. Allah Yar complainant (P.W.2) along with his brother Fateh Sher (P.W.-l) and nephew Ahmed Sher (P.W.3) where returning to their village from their land where they had installed a turbine and when reached near the Dera of Muhammad Ramzan, Ahmad Khan, Abdur Rehman, Zia ul Haq (petitioners) and Haji Muhammad Muwaz (Acquitted accused) armed with "Wahola" Muhammad Yousaf, Abdul Haq and Malik Dad (acquitted accused) empty handed came there. Muhammad Yousaf, Abdul Haq and Malik Dad (acquitted accused) started giving fist and kick blows to Ahmad Sher and at the same time, Muhammad Muwaz (acquitted accused) gave blow of 'Wahola' to Fateh Sher (P.W.l) which landed on his head whereupbn he fell down. Ahmad Khaq petitioner then inflicted 'Wahola' blow on the nose of his brother Fateh Sher (P.W.l). Zia-ul-Haq petitioner gave two 'Wahola' blows which landed on the right and left leg of the brother of the complainant and thereafter Abdur Rehman petitioner inflicted three 'Wahola' blows on the back side, right hand on upper side and left hand of Fateh Sher brother of the complainant. On raising hue and cry Muhammad Zakir and Muhammad Abbas P.Ws. Attracted to the spot and on seeing them, the accused fled away from the spot.
' The motive behind the occurrence was alleged to be that the accused had already installed a turbine and subsequently the complainant party had also installed a turbine and the water of turbine of the accused used to pass through their land which they resisted due to which the accused with their common intention had attacked on them.
3. After usual investigation report under section 173, Cr.P.C. Was submitted in the Court. The learned trial Court after supplying copies of the documents under section 241-A, Cr.P.C. To the petitioners and the co-accused framed the charge against them on 3-1-1996, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the petitioners and the coaccused produced as many as five P.Ws. P.W. 1 Fateh Sher is the injured while Allah Yar complainant and P.W.3 Ahmed Sher are the eyewitnesses of the occurrence. Dr. Muhammad Sajjad Malik (P.W.4) had medically examined the injured P.W. While Abdul Shakoor C. 556 appeared as P.W.5.
5. In their statements recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. The petitioners and the acquitted accused had denied the allegations levelled against them and professed their innocence.
However, Ahmad Khan petitioner in reply to a question that "Why this case against you and why the P.Ws. Have deposed against you?" replied as under:- "The P.Ws. Are inimical towards me and they have deposed falsely. In 1990 Muhammad Iqbal son of my maternal uncle Lai Khan was murdered in which Muhammad Hayat real brother of Fateh Sher injured P.W. Was challaned and after undergoing the sentence awarded to Muhammad Hayat by the Court, he has been released and the real brothers of said Muhammad Iqbal deceased has attacked on the complainant party but due to enmity we have been falsely involved in the case."
'However, they had not opted to make statements under section 340 (2), Cr.P.C. Nor they produced any evidence in their defence. The learned trial Court in order to reach just conclusion of the case examined Abdul Shakoor Constable as C.W.-l.
6. The learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, had passed the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence against the petitioners as detailed in para 1 ante and the appeal filed by them was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab. Hence, all these matters before this Court.
7. At the very outset of the arguments the learned counsel for the petitioners had opted not to challenge conviction of the petitioners on merits and only prays for reduction in the quantum of sentence of imprisonment.
8. On the other hand learned counsel for the complainant assisted by the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General have opposed this revision petition and contends that the petitioners have already been dealt with leniently in the quantum of sentence.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, it is straight away noticed that the prosecution had examined the injured as P.W.l besides the two eyewitnesses to prove the allegation of causing injury on the person of P.W.l which is borne out from the medical evidence furnished by the doctor P.W.4. All the prosecution witnesses are consistent on material points and there is nothing on the record to disbelieve them. The minor contradictions in the statements of the witnesses can be overruled due to the reason that there exists a long period between the occurrence and their statements. Even otherwise the conviction of the petitioners has not been challenged on merits which is maintained. As far as quantum of sentence is concerned, it is noticed that the occurrence in the present case had taken place in the year, 199S and the petitioners had faced the agony of trial for more than six years and thereafter Crl. Appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed on 5-6-2007 and since then this Crl. Rev is pending before this Court.
Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioners is reduced as under:- Ahmad Khan337-A (ii), P.P.C.4 years to 3 years' R.I. with arsh Rs.9,495.3 Abdul Rehman337-F (iii), P.P.C.2--years to 1-- year R.I. with Daman Rs.15000 337-F (iv), P.P.C.3-- years' to 2 -- years' R.I. with Daman Rs.25000 Zia ul Haq 337-F (iii), P.P.C.2 years to 1 year R.I. with Daman Rs. 10,000 337-F (i), P.P.C.6 months R.I. with Daman Rs.5000 ' The sentence awarded to the petitioners run concurrently and benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
Will also be extended to them. On realization of the Arsh and Daman amount, the same will be disbursed to Fateh Sher injured (P.W.l) with the said modification in the quantum of sentence only the impugned judgment is maintained and this Crl. Revision No,440 of 2007 is disposed of accordingly. During the pendency of this Crl. Rev. The operation of sentence of Zia ul Haq petitioner was suspended by this Court vide order dated 5-9-2007 and the learned trial Court will issue warrants for his committal to jail to undergo the remaining sentence, if any.
10. As regards Criminal Appeal No,886 of 2007 filed against the acquittal of Haji Muhammad Muwaz co-accused/ respondent is concerned, I do not find any improbability infirmity in the impugned judgment of acquittal of Haji Muhammad Muwaz recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab, which being based on sound and cogent reasons does not warrant any interference by this Court. Hence Criminal Appeal No, 886 of 2007 being devoid of any merit is dismissed.
11. In view of above, no question arises for enhancement of sentence of the petitioners and Criminal Misc. No, 1635-M of 2007 seeking the said relief is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.