Manzoor Ahmad, Maqbool Ahmad and Muhammad Khalid appellants have challenged their conviction and sentences vide Criminal Appeal No. 485 of 2015. They were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chichawatni in case FIR No. 221/2013 dated 21.7.2013 registered at Police Station Ghaziabad District Sahiwal for the of fences under Sections 365-B, 376(2), PPC.
2. On conclusion of trial, appellants were convicted vide judgment dated 5.9.2015 under Section 365-B, PPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life each with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each. In case of default in payment of the, delinquent convict to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months. They were also convicted and sentenced to same terms under Section 376(2), PPC. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was extended to the appellants and sentences awarded to them were ordered to run concurrently . Complainant Shabbir Ahmad has filed Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2015 seeking enhancement of sentences of the appellants. Both the matters arising out of same judgment dated 5.9.2015 (impugned judgment), will be decided through this single judgment.
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. Crime was reported to police by Shabb ir Ahmad (PW-2) through written application Ex,P-A, on the basis of which FIR Ex.P-A/l was registered. Prosecution story as narrated in the crime report is that on 17.07.2013 at 08:30 P.M., complainant's sister Rashida Parveen aged eighteen years went to fetch grocery from shop. When she reached near home of Manzoor Ahmad and Maqbool Ahmad (appellants), they alongwith Muhammad Khalid (appellant) let her sit in a white colour car forcibly . Hearing cacophony , complainant (PW-2) alongwith Liaqat Ali and Tariq Mahmood (Since given up PWs) attracted to the spot and witnessed the occurrence in a bulb's light. Accused successfully took away complainant's sister in that car. Accused were approached through punchayat who initially kept on promising to return, the abductee but of no avail.
5. Alleged abductee was recovered on 23.07.2013, who was produced by police before Ilaqa Magistrate with an application (Ex.D-B) seeking direction for her medical examination but she refused before the Magistrate to get her medically examined stating that the accused did not commit Zina with her. Request of police was ultimately turned down by learned Magistrate vide order dated 23.07.2019. Thereafter , alleged abductee remained in her home and on 03.08.2019, she herself approached Ilaqa Magistrate with an application for her medical examination. Said application was allowed and thereafter , alleged abductee was medically examined on 05.08.2013. Refusal of the victim girl for her medical examination on relevant time i.e. 23.07.2013 claiming that accused did not commit rape and her subsequent stance for medical examination after eleven days, casts serious doubt qua her truthfulness.
Medical examination conducted at very belated stage vide MLC Ex.P-H even does not suggest commission of rape (forceful Zina) with the victim girl. There is no report of Chemical Examiner or DNA in support of prosecution's case.
Allegation of rape was levelled against three persons therefore, DNA test was sine qua non in order to ascertain the truth, which test is missing in this case.
As regards abduction of the victim girl, she was allegedly abducted from a populated area near her home at 08:30 P.M. when a bulb light was also on there and despite attracting the witnesses, one of whom was real brother of the victim girl, accused fled away taking the victim with them. This version is very hard to believe. Both the independent witnesses of alleged abduction i.e. Liaqat Ali and Tariq Mehmood were given up by prosecution. As per prosecution's own showing, no effort was made by complainant to report the matter to police immediately and application Ex.P-A was moved after four days of the alleged occurrence. Such unwarranted delay in reporting the matter to police also casts doubt qua version put forth by prosecution.
6. In such a backdrop, testimony of PW-2 and PW-3 is not credible and conviction could not be recorded on the basis of such an-unreliable evidence, as such findings of conviction recorded by learned trial Court are not sustainable. Resultantly , criminal appeal in hand is allowed and conviction and sentences awarded by learned trial Court through impugned judgment are set aside. Appellants Manzoor Ahmad, Maqbool Ahmad and Muhammad Khalid are acquitted of the charge extending benefit of doubt to them. They are in jail. They be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
7. In view of above, Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2015 is dismissed .