' ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, J.---This appeal is directed against the judgment/order of the learned Trial Court/ Additional Sessions Judge-I, Karak dated 12-7-2013, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner in case FIR No,228, dated 1-7-2012, registered under sections 324/337-F(v)/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Karak, District Karak:--
(i) Under section 324, P.P.C. To undergo 05 years R.I. With a fine of Rs,50,000 and in default thereof to undergo 03 months S.I. Further.
(ii) Under sections 337-F(v) to undergo 05 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay Rs,1,00,000 as "Daman" in lump sum to injured complainant, within the meaning of section 544-A, Cr.P.C.
(iii) Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.
(iv) Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Has been extended in favour of the appellant.
2. As per contents of First Information Report, registered on the basis of murasila, Rauf Ullah S.I.
Police Station Karak, on receipt of information regarding shifting of injured to KDA hospital Karak, rushed there where he found Wasi Ullah in injured condition, who reported him that on the night of occurrence he along with Rehman Gul had proceeded to the Baithak, situated in Malik CNG, within the limits of village Esak Chuntra, to attend the music program, where accused Rashid Alam (appellant-convict herein), was also present with co-accused Arif. On seeing the complainant, accused Arif commanded his co-accused Rashid Alam to kill, as a result, he opened fire at him with his Kalashnikov with intention to commit his murder, with which the complainant was hit on his thighs. The occurrence is stated to have witnessed by Rehman Gul. Motive advanced by the complainant is previous blood feud.
3. After arrest of the accused-appellant and completion of investigation, challan was submitted against him before the trial Court, where he was summoned and formally charged to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined ten witnesses. After close of the prosecution evidence, statement of the appellant-accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. Was recorded, wherein he denied the prosecution allegations and professed his innocence. He, however, neither wished to be examined on oath nor opted to produce evidence in defence. On conclusion of trial, the learned trial Court, after hearing both the sides, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal.
4. I have heard the exhaustive arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned D.A.G. And have gone through the record with their valuable assistance.
5. From perusal of the FIR it reveals that two accused are charged for the present incident, however, the role of effective firing has been attributed to appellant-accused while the role of commanding "Lalkara" has been assigned to co-accused Arif, who has already been acquitted on the basis of compromise. Both, the complainant and the accused-appellant are co-villagers inter se. As per medical evidence injured complainant has sustained six firearm injuries on his person, which cannot be caused by any friendly hands. In these circumstances, one cannot imagine that a person who has been subjected to such a severe attack, would spare the actual assailant and would implicate innocent person. Thus, question of mistaken identity and false implication or substitution does not arise. The occurrence is stated to have taken place in the Baithak of Malik CNG. During investigation, the spot has been inspected by the Investigating Officer and the site plan has been prepared at the pointation of the eye-witness, which was later on, verified by the complainant injured. Bloodstained earth Exh.P.1 from the place of injured has been secured vide recovery memo Exh.PC. Similarly, the bloodstained garment of the injured having corresponding cut marks has also been taken into possession vide recovery memo Exh.PC/1. The bloodstained earth and shirt of the injured have been sent to the FSL for analysis and report and according to Serologist report, it was human blood and of the same group. These material pieces of evidence establish the place of occurrence to be the same as disclosed by the complainant in his report.
According to medico legal report of the injured Exh.P.W.8/1 the injuries found on his person, by the Medical Officer have been declared to be the result of firearm which further substantiate the version of the complainant that he was fired at. Now the moot question for determination would be that who caused these firearm injuries on the person of the complainant injured?
6. Injured complainant and Rehman Gul the eye-witness of the occurrence have been examined as P.W.5 and P.W.6. They have reiterated the same version given in the FIR Both have directly charged the appellant-accused for firing effectively at the injured complainant. Both have been subjected to lengthy and comb searching cross-examination by the defence, but they stood firm to their stance and nothing beneficial to defence could be extracted from their mouths, which may create doubt in the prosecution case. Rather, they remained firm to their stance and corroborated each other on material particulars of the occurrence. It is settled law that the evidence of an injured witness must be given due weight, being a stamped witness, thus, his presence at the spot, at the time of occurrence, cannot be doubted. The statement of an injured witness generally, is to be considered very reliable and it is unlikely that he will spare the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate some one else. His testimony has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence and this lends support to his testimony that he was present at the time and place of occurrence. Thus, the testimony of injured witness is accorded a special status in law, as he is a witness that comes with a built-in guarantee of his presence at the scene of crime. Very convincing evidence is required to discredit the testimony of an injured witness. The statement of complainant, being a stamped witness, may not be brushed aside on the basis of minor discrepancies or contradictions. Minor discrepancies do occur in the statements of P.Ws. With the passage of time, which are inbuilt proof of veracity of their statements. They are never expected to give a tape-recorded statement, having no discrepancy inter se. Such like discrepancies may not affect the merits of the case. Those contradictions are considered to be fatal which materially negates the prosecution version, but no such contradiction has been pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant-convict in the prosecution evidence. It is well entrenched principle that in hurt cases solitary statement of the injured corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient for recording conviction, if it rings true. In the instant case, complainant injured has furnished the actual and truthful account of the occurrence which is corroborated by eye-witness Rehman Gul and supported by medical evidence.
7. The record suggests that appellant-convict has been arrested on 2-10-2012, after a period of about 3 months, after registration of the case and proceedings under sections 204 and 87, Cr.P.C.
Have also been initiated against him. The appellant has not furnished any plausible explanation for his absconsion. No doubt, abscondence is mere a piece of circumstantial evidence, but it can be taken into consideration as an additional circumstance, when otherwise; the prosecution has proved its case through cogent and confidence inspiring evidence.
8. In view of the evidence discussed above, the prosecution has successfully brought home the guilt of appellant-accused beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt and the learned Trial Court after proper appraisal of evidence has rightly convicted him. I see no infirmity, illegality or any misreading or non-reading of evidence which may warrant interference of this Court in its appellate jurisdiction. Thus, finding no merit, this appeal stands dismissed.