Salim Khalid and Iftikhar Ahmad were convicted under sections 457 and 354, P. P. C. And sentenced to two years' R. I. Each and a fine of Rs. 200 in default to undergo six months' R. I. Under section 457, P. P. C. And six months' R. I. Each under section 354, P. P. C. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Their appeal was dismissed on 18th May, 1972. They have filed two separate revisions which will be disposed of by this judgment.
2. The prosecution case is that on 21 February, 1970 at about 10 p.m. Mst. Shamim Akhtar was inside her house. Her father had not come home yet and her mother had gone to her parent's house. Mst. Shamim Akhtar was looking after her younger brother. Suddenly, the two accused scaled over the courtyard wall-and made an entry into the room where she was sitting. Salim Khalid threatened her with a knife and Iftikhar lifted her on his shoulders and they were about to' take her away when her father Fateh Ali appeared on the scene. On seeing him the accused ran away. He raised an alarm which attracted P. Ws. Ghulam Nabi, Wazir and Fazal. With the help of these witnesses both the accused were apprehended with the knife. Thereafter Mst. Shamim Akhtar went home. Salim Khalid accused who had a knife with him, was disarmed. Iftikhar accused was taken to the police station which was at a distance of 2/3 furlongs from the place of occurrence.
On the way Salim Khalid got himself released and escaped. P. W. 5 Muhammad Rafiq Shah, Head Constable registered the F.I.R. Exh. P. A. At 1.45 a.m. On 22nd February, 1980. The case was investigated by the S. H. O. Who prepared the injury statement of Iftikhar. Salim Khalid accused was admit--ted to bail by the Sessions Judge, Gujranwala. After completing the investigation, the accused were sent up for trial.st
3. The accused denied guilt and ascribed the case to enmity. Accord--ing to Salim Khalid, earlier police had foisted a number of cases against him but he was acquitted in all. He filed certified copies of, the judgments of five cases. According to Iftikhar, he had gone to see one Sheikh Altaf in Lalamusa, where he learnt that he had gone to Mohallah Eidgah, and when he reached there and his presence there was objected to by the people of the locality upon which an altercation took place and he abused them. They took him to the Police Station.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. There are strange features in this case which have not been explained by the prosecution Mst. Shamim Akhtar prosecutrix was about 15 years of age according to her own statement. The lady doctor who examined her did not examine her for age. The lady doctor was not examined as witness. P. W. 7 Aziz Ahmad Khan, S. H. O. Under cross- examination admitted that he got Mst. Shamim Akhtar medically examined. He was questioned whether Mst. Shamim Akhtar was a woman of easy virtue. He had no knowledge about it. His explanation for not having cited the lady doctor witness was that she did not sustain any injury, therefore; the lady doctor was not produced.
5. A perusal of the F. I. R. Would show that Mst. Shamim Akhtar was not a virgin and. Had been subjected to sexual intercourse. Vaginal swabs were also obtained, but there is nothing on the record to snow that they were received back after examination. Although the: peti--tioners have not taken up the plea of any association with Mst. Shamim Akhtar, but the circumstances appearing in the evidence, indicate that she was used to sexual intercourse. At this stage it may be pointed out that the case of Salim Khalid accused stands on entirely different footing. He was said to be armed with a knife. Three persons apprehended him and there was not a scratch on any of them. This story seems to be improbable. However, if they had disarmed him, then for him to have escaped was again improbable. His plea that many other cases were foisted against him and he was acquitted in all cases was proved by the documentary evidence produced by him. Moreover, according to the P. Ws. Both accused were not known to them before. They were not got identified.
So far as Iftikhar Ahmad is concerned, although, he was said to have been appre--hended at the spot, yet the question remains whether the witnesses had seen him entering the house of Fateh Ali.
Except for the statement of informant and his daughter, none of the other witnesses had seen him coming out of the house. On the other hand it is in the statement of Fateh Ali that Iftikhar Ahmad was holding Shamim Akhtar by her hand and was dragging her. There are no mark of dragging on her body. On the contrary she was said that she was lifted by the accused on the shoulders and brought out of her house. This is entirely a different story. A Whether she was a minor or of age is also a doubtful matter. The probability that Iftikhar was surprised by her father, cannot be excluded. Although the Police Station was only at a distance of two furlongs, yet the report was made after about three hours. Giving the benefit of doubt the petitioners, I accept their petitions and acquit them of the charge against them. They shall stand discharged of their bail bonds.