' Appellant Hammad Haider has challenged his conviction and sentence through this Criminal Appeal No,
156. Of 2006. He was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Taunsa Camp at D.G.
Khan along-with co-accused Muhammad Yousaf in case FIR No, 106/2005 registered under Sections 302, 34, PPC at Police Station City D.G. Khan.
2. On conclusion of trial, learned trial Court vide his judgment dated 31.01.2006 convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under: ' Convicted U/S. 302(b), PPC and sentenced to imprisonment for lift. He was held liable to pay Rs, 20,000/- as compensation in terms of Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. To the legal heirs of deceased and in case of default in payment thereof, to further undergo imprisonment for six months (S.I.).
' However, co-accused mentioned above was acquitted of the charge.
3. FIR was got registered by Qamar Ali son of Qalandar Hussain. Prosecution story as narrated in the FIR is that on 05.06.2005 at about 09:30 p.m., complainant was present near shrine of Ameer Shah, when on hearing noise he proceeded towards Block-T. He saw that Asif Ali alias Munna and Yousaf had caught complainant's brother Haider Ali, whereas Ansar Ali, Ushtar Ali and Hammad Haider (appellant) while armed with Churrees, were causing injuries to Haider Ali. One Irfan Haider was trying to rescue Haider Ali. Imran Haider also attracted to the spot in the meantime. Complainant alongwith Imran Haider came forward to rescue Haider Ali, but the accused persons threatened them and in their view, Ansar Ali, Ushtar Ali and Hammad Haider gave several churee blows to Haider Ali at different parts of his body. Many people from the locality reached there, on which accused persons fled away. Haider Ali succumbed to the injuries when he was being shifted to hospital.
4. After registration of FIR, investigation of this case was conducted by PW-09 Ghulam Shabbir SI.
Report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Was submitted before trial Court. Appellant and co-accused Muhammad Yousaf were declared juvenile and their trial was conducted separately. Formal charge was framed, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined nine witnesses. Medical evidence, was furnished by PW-8 Dr. Abdul Rehman Qaisrani, who noted six incised wounds and one lacerated wound on the dead body. According to PW-8, due to multiple injuries and specially Injury No, 7, bleeding occurred profusely, which resulted in shock and ultimate death. Ocular account was furnished by PW-6 Qamar Ali (complainant) and PW-7 Irfan Haider. After completing prosecution evidence, statement of appellant was recorded under Section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein he took the plea of self defence. Appellant did not opt to appear in the witness box as required under Section 340(2), Cr.P.C. However, he producect Dr. Mehmood Khan Leghari as DW-1 and Muhammad Imran as DW-2.
5. On conclusion of trial appellant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned above, hence this criminal appeal.
6. Learned counsel for appellant argued that the place and time of occurrence in this case is not disputed, however, the prosecution had suppressed the injuries sustained by appellant; that plea of appellant that he alongwith others had caused injuries to Haider Ali deceased in self defence, is supported by medical evidence; that a case under Section 302(c), PPC was made out and that the sentence already undergone by appellant was sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
7. Conversely, learned Additional Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for complainant argued that appellant had not surrendered for medical examination on the first day of occurrence; that on the second day he was examined by doctor and only skin deep injuries were noted, which were not sufficient to allow him to cause death of a person on the pretext of self defence.
8. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record with their able assistance.
9. Perusal of statements of PW-6 Qamar Ali (complainant) and PW-7 Irfan Haider reveals that on the day of occurrence at 09:30 p.m., Haider Ali (deceased) alongwith Irfan Haider (PW-7) went to the house of accused to make complaint about an incident which took place one day earlier. It was case of the prosecution that accused (appellant) Hammad alongwith Ushtar and Ansar were carrying knife (churees) and all of them caused injuries to Haider Ali on various parts of his body.
Complainant Qamar Ali and Imran Haider also reached the spot. The accused persons after inflicting churee blows escaped. During trial above mentioned witnesses reiterated the same version. Medical evidence was furnished by PW-8 Dr. Abdul Rehman, who noted seven injuries on the dead body of Haider Ali. Ocular account furnished by eye-witnesses is straight forward and confidence inspiring. The parties admitted the time and place of occurrence. However, version of.
Appellant was that complainant party injured Imran Ali (DW-2), Ushtar and Muhammad Yousaf who were medically examined by DW-1 and the appellant caused injuries to deceased in self defence. Present appellant did not sustain any injury during the occurrence. Fatal injury to the deceased was attributed to present appellant whereas co-accused Ushtar and Ansar also inflicted churee blows to Haider Ali (deceased) who have filed separate Criminal Appeal No, 82 of 2006 against their conviction and sentence. Plea of self defence raised by the appellant was not available to him in the peculiar circumstances of the case. Version put forth by appellant that Haider Ali deceased and his companions were the assailants, is not correct as they went only to make complaint but the accused over-powered the deceased and stabbed him to death. Learned trial- Court in this case has correctly appreciated evidence and findings recorded are in line with the facts established on record.
10. On re-appraisal of evidence, I am of the view that conviction recorded and sentence awarded to the appellant does not call for interference in appeal. Therefore, appeal in hand is dismissed, while upholding conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Appellant is on bail as his sentence was suspended by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2011. He shall be taken in custody and sent to jail to serve the remaining portion of sentence awarded to him by the trial Court.