ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J-This order will dispose of Criminal Petitions No. 486/81 and No. 487/81, both filed by Bilal Hussain petitioner. He was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, who convicted him under sec--tion 307, P. P. C., for which he was sentenced to 3 years' R. I. And a fine of Rs. 2,000 or in default to undergo further R. I. For six months. He filed an appeal against the judgment which was dismissed by the High Court vide the impugned order. He was also tried and convicted under the Arms Ordinance for possession of the knife with which he had committed the above-noted offence, and was sentenced to one year's R. I. His second appeal against his conviction under the Arms Ordinance before the High Court, too, met the same fate.
Hence the two petitions.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The only contention raised by him was that the offence made out against the petitioner does not fall within the purview of section 307, P. r. C.
But under section 326, P. P. C.
3. In the first place, considering the nature of the weapon used and the location of the injury (i. e.
Abdomen), the Courts below were justified in holding that he had committed the offence under section 307, P. P. C. Secondly, even an offence under section 326, P. P. C.Punishable with imprisonment for life or a term which may extend to 10 yearsR. I. Having been sentenced only to 3 years' R. I. It would not make any practical difference to the petitioner even if he had been found guilty under section 326, P. P. C., Criminal Petition No. 486/81 is, therefore, dismissed.
4. As to Criminal Petition No. 487/81, we find that the recovery of the knife, which is the crime weapon, has been duly proved and the petitioner was rightly convicted for its possession under