Through this petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.0 validity of order dated 4.4.2009, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska, whereby he accepted revision petition against order dated 1.4.2009 passed by learned Magistrate, has been questioned.
2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the filing of this criminal revision are that Muraad/present petitioner, filed an application dated 17.12.2008 before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, Daska, district Sialkot narrating therein that his son Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmad, aged about 24, years, about half and eight months prior, was present in his Baithak (Drawing room), however, on searching home he complained of feeling severe pain in his belly whereupon the petitioner moved him to Civil Hospital, Gujranwala, where he died and was buried by the petitioner/father of the deceased.
He has further narrated that on 17.12.2008, he had come to know through Muhammad Nadeem, Tanveer Ahmad, Muhammad Shafaaqat and Muhammad Arif that they saw the respondents sitting in the Baithak and that they had murdered son, of the petitioner by administering him poison. He has mentioned motive behind the occurrence that there had been a petty quarrel occurred between the petitioner and the respondents.
3. The learned Magistrate having heard both the sides concluded that death of petitioner's son being unnatural and ordered for exhumation of dead body. of Muhammad Zeeshan Ahma:d directing the M.S. concerned to get conducted disinterment of the dead body of Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmad/deceased. This order was assailed through a revision petition filed by one of the respondents Muhammad Bashir before the learned Additional Session Judge, Daska, who while, setting aside the order dated 1.4.2009, passed by the learned Magistrate observed that Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmed was in his senses and in a position to disclose the true facts of his abdominal pain before his father but he only stated about suffering from pain-but did not disclose that he had been administered poison by anyone/respondents.
4. Heard and available record perused.
5. It has been noted that Muraad Ali, petitioner, filed application dated 17.12.2008 before the learned Magistrate alleging therein that his son had been administered poison about eight and half months before filling of the same and the Muhammad Nadeem, Tanveer Ahmad, Muhammad Shafaqat and Muhammad Arif told him on 17.12.2008 that they saw the respondents sitting with his son in the baithk and that his son had been killed by them by way of administering poison to him.
The petitioner while appearing as PW-1 on 3.3.2009 stated that he had no enmity with anyone while in his aforementioned application he mentioned that his petty quarrel had been occurred with the respondents due to which they had killed his son. Muhammad Arif, 1W-2 in his statement did not disclose that Muhammad Zeeshan had been administered poison by the respondents while (IW-3, Muhammad Shafaqat Ali narrated that according to him no such occurrence had taken place.. The 'petitioner closed his evidence without tendering any documentary evidence despite affording an opportunity for the purpose by the learned Court. While Muhammad Maalik, Ghulam Rasool and Muhammad-ul-Hassan, appeared as RW-1 RW-2 and RW-3 respectively, who unanimously stated that due to quarrel between petitioner and his son. (deceased) the latter had taken poison/poisoning pills and this very matter was known to by the whole vicinity mentioning motive behind the occurrence that as the daughter of the petitioner has contracted marriage with Muhammad Atshad son of Bashir Ahmad, of her own free will but without the blessings of her father/present petitioner, therefore, he has mala fidely implicated the respondents in this case.
7. In view of the above, perusal of the statements available on record from both the sides reveals that admittedly the death of Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmad son of the petitioner was, prima facie, unnatural viz he himself had taken or given by someone else the poison, therefore, in these circumstances, this Court agrees to the finding of the learned Magistrate Ist Class, Daska, for exhumation of the dead-body Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmad, son of the petitioner. As regard the argument raised on behalf of the respondents that no time limit for dis interesting of the dead body has been mentioned, therefore, exhumation at this stage will' not serve any useful purpose, in this regard, I would like to refer that Modi in his Medical Jurisprudence and Texiclogy in Chapter IV opines that in India and England no time-limit is fixed for the disinterment of a body. In France, this period is limited to ten years and it is thirty years in Germany. Further reliance can also be placed on Muhammad Ramzan and others V. The State and another (1987 SCM R 272) wherein the objection of such nature was overruled observing that disinterment can take place even after one year to ascertain the cause of death. Therefore, this petition is allowed and the order dated 19.5.2009, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska is set aside and exhumation of Muhammad Zeeshan Ahmad, son of the petitioner/deceased is ordered to be conducted in terms of order dated .1.4.2009, passed by the learned Magistrate Ist Class, Daska, immediately after the receipt of this order but not beyond the month of July 2009.