'PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, J.-- Appellants Shaukat Ali son of Ali Muhammad (2) Muhammad Farooq son of Ali Muhammad (3) Muhammad Ramzan son of Khan along with their co-accused persons namely, Muhammad Abbas son of Khan, Ahmad Din son of Bakhsha and Ahmad Din son of Basara were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge Sahiwal in a private complaint filed by Muhammad Azam for offences under sections 302/324/ 148/149, P.P.C. For causing murder of Muhammad Rafique deceased and causing injuries to P.Ws. Initially a case F.I.R. Bearing No,197/96 was got registered at Police Station Ghaziabad, however, the complainant being dissatisfied with the investigation filed the private complaint.
2. The prosecution produced as many as 10 witnesses to prove its case which included ocular account and medical evidence. The appellants/accused also produced defence evidence. The learned Trial Court after minutely examining the evidence led by the parties acquitted co-accused Muhammad Abbas, Ahmad Din and Ali Muhammad primarily on the ground that to the extent of role attributed to them regarding infliction of injuries to the deceased and injured P.Ws were belied by the medical report whereas the appellants were convicted and sentenced to various terms with certain observations which are contained in paras 26 and 27 of the impugned judgment which are reproduced hereunder:--- "While discussing the entire evidence produced by the complainant and keeping in my mind the statement of D.W.-1, a quarrel was started between Mst. Amiran P.W.1, and Mst. Jindan wife of Ali Muhammad accused. After this juncture the male members of the rivalries came on the spot and the occurrence took place at the spur of moment. In my vision when the place and time of occurrence is admitted, the complainant has proved his story narrated in Ex-PA. As the matter was brusted at the spur of moment the case falls within the purview of section 302(c), P.P.C. For the extent of Shaukat Ali, accused. I hold him guilty under section 302(c), P. P. C . Under Tazeer and sentence him to 10 years' R.I. And direct him to pay compensation of Rs,10,000 in default of payment of which he is to further undergo R.I. For three months. If the compensation is realized it shall be given to the legal heirs of the deceased.
27. So far as Muhammad Farooq accused is concerned, he inflicted injuries upon the head of Muhammad Hanif, P.W. His case falls under section 337-A(ii) of P.P.C. I hold him guilty under section 337-A (ii) , P. P . C . And sentence him to five years' R.I. And he is also directed to pay Rs,5,000 as Arsh."
3. It is, inter alia contended that prosecution has hopelessly failed to prove the charge against the appellants and that there was no justification for the Trial Court to convict the appellants for any offence; that the injuries suffered by the appellants' side have been suppressed by the prosecution; that in fact there was no premeditation; that during the course of investigation the version put- forth by the complainant side was found false; that in fact it was a quarrel between two women; that Mst. Ameena wife of D.W.-1 and his brother's wife Mst. Jindan were quarrelling with each other and that his son Muhammad Hanif came out of the house and thereafter Muhammad Hanif accused intervened and inflicted fire-arm injury to Muhammad Ameen incidentally. He further says that Muhammad Hanif in fact wanted to hit Shaukat but the same hit to Muhammad Ameen deceased. D.W.-2 Azmat Hussain Shah, D.S.P. Also stated that father of Muhammad Ameen deceased appeared before him and stated that Muhammad Ameen was done to death by Muhammad Hanif co-accused. Learned counsel for the appellants has also referred to various parts of the evidence of the prosecution to canvass that appellants were innocent and there was no intention to kill deceased Muhammad Ameen. His main thrust of argument is that D.W.-2 Wali Muhammad who is father of Muhammad Ameen in categorical terms has exonerated the appellants and in spite of his statements, the learned Trial Court proceeded to convict the appellants which was unwarranted.
4. Conversely, learned D.P.-G. Although opposes that appeal with vehemence but could not controvert the submissions made at bar by learned counsel for the appellants from record.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. The learned Trial Court after discussing the entire evidence has reached to the conclusion that there was no premeditation. The occurrence took place at the spur of moment, which started from quarrel between the women of both the families. After examination of the record I am of the considered view that prosecution has successfully proved its case against them beyond any shadow of doubt. The conviction awarded to the appellants by the learned Trial Court is, therefore, maintained.
7. As far as quantum of sentence is concerned, in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and for the fact that occurrence was not pre-meditated, took place at the spur of the moment, which started with the quarrel of two ladies, the complainant party has also suppressed material facts which is evident from the statements of none else but Wali Muhammad D.W.-1 father of the deceased, corroborated by statement of D.W.2 D.S.P. Who has investigated the case. The appellants Muhammad Farooq and Muhammad Ramzan, I have been informed have already served out substantive part of their sentences. Sentence of Muhammad Farooq appellant was suspended on 29;5-2001 and that of Muhammad Ramzan vide order dated 24-10-2001 whereas Shaukat Ali is behind the bars since 12-12-2002. In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of this case I am of the considered view that they have already served out a substantive sentence.
Therefore, the sentences awarded to all the appellants is reduced to one which each of them have already undergone as the same in my view would meet the ends of justice. The punishment of compensation, Arsh and Daman are also set aside. Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Farooq appellants are on bail. Their sureties are discharged.
8. Appellant Shaukat shall be released forthwith if no more required in any other case.
9. With these observations, this appeal stands disposed of.