MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.---Since Criminal Appeal No.25/2019 filed by the convict/appellant Rehmat Alam son of Sultan Shah and Criminal Revision No. 27/2019 are arising out of one and the same matter, therefore these are being disposed of through this single judgment.
2. The brief facts of the case have been highlighted in para 3 of the impugned judgment, which are reproduced for ready reference.
"3. The fact of the case as disclosed in the FIR, briefly stated, are that deceased accused Shehzada Alam appeared before SHO PS Gahkuch Mr. Barkatullah Khan SIP, on 23-04-2015 at 630 hours. He verbally reported to the SHO that he had gone to village Bubur on 22-04-2015 to fulfill a personal matter. To return to his home, he was standing on the main road near Bubur bridge, meanwhile two persons namely Mohammad Yaqoob son of Jamsheed (the victim of occurrence) and Rehmat Alam son of Sultan Shah came there in an Alto car and that they are going-to Hatoon for fishing. On this he sat with them in the Car. They had brought along with them a bottle of wine also. On the way said two persons asked the complainant to accompany them and he accepted their offer. At Hatoon they parked the Car at an ascent of the road and went towards Khari for fishing. On the way after covering a considerable distance they sat down and drank the wine. Meanwhile Muhammad Yaqub asked Rehmat Alam to untie his trouser string as he wanted to commit sodomy with him. He insisted on his demand. But Rehmat Alam replied to him that he belonged to a respectable family and he could not allow him to commit such a hateful offence against him. On this Muhammad Yaqub said that you people have broken my teeth and your brother has run away from the country. He further said that I have brought you here to take revenge and he caught hold of Rehmat Alam pulled out a knife from his pocket and attacked Muhammad Yaqub. He inflicted many blows of knife with the intention to kill him. Muhammad Yaqub got seriously injured and fell on the ground besmeared with blood. During the altercation the hands of Rehmat Alam also got injured.
Thereafter Shehzada Alam fled the scene feeling fear and arrived at Fajar time at Silpi on foot. From where he appeared before the SHO PS Gahkuch and reported to him about the occurrence."
3. After usual investigation the convict/appellant and 04 others were sent to stand trial in the Court of learned Sessions Judge Ghizer who after full fledge trial announced the verdict, which reads as under:- "16. In the light of forgoing reasons, the accused namely Azhar Hussain, Tahir Hussain and Abdul Manan are acquitted giving them benefit of doubt. They are already on bail, bail bonds- and surety bonds cancelled.
17. However, the prosecution has proved its case against accused Rehmat Alam son of Sultan Shah resident of Bubur beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, he is convicted under section 324, P.P.C. Keeping in view, the facts and circumstances of the case, he is sentenced with simple imprisonment of five years. He shall also pay Rs.
10000/= as fine. The amount of fine shall be paid to the victim of occurrence namely Muhammad Yaqub. In case of failure of the convicted accused to pay said amount to the victim of occurrence, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr. P. C. is also extended in favour of convicted offender Rehmat Alam. The weapon of offence recovered from possession of convicted accused, a knife made in Deer KPK, mentioned in the challan shall be confiscated as state property."
4. Being aggrieved from the judgment of the trial Court the appellant has filed the instant appeal before this Court.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that judgment passed by the learned trial Court is perverse and the reasons advanced by the learned trial Court while convicting the appellant are not only artificial but also perverse, hence the judgment is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The provision of section 324, P.P.C. is not attracted as the medical officer has not mentioned in medical certificate the nature of the injuries caused by the appellant to the victim. The learned counsel further submitted that no evidence has come on record, from where it could be inferred that the appellant's intention was to kill the victim. The victim was at the mercy of the appellant and he was in a position to cause more harm to the victim but he refrained himself to do so which aspect has gone un-noticed by the learned trial Court while passing the impugned judgment. Lastly, that the statement of the defence witness has not been properly appreciated which if considered, might have changed the complexion of the whole case. The punishment awarded by the learned trial Court is harsh and not sustainable in the. eyes of law. The learned counsel relied on PLD 2001 Peshawar-132, PLD 1990 FSC 57, 2013 YLR 982 Peshawar and 2015 PCr.LJ 554 Peshawar.
6. On the other hand the learned Dy. Advocate General submitted that the appellant and his co-accused Shahzada Alam (since dead) have tried to paint a false story, which later on was found false. Per learned Dy.
Advocate General Shahzada Alam and the appellant actively participated in the occurrence and the victim has narrated.the occurrence in a natural and straight forward manner. Medical evidence is fully in consonance with the story of occurrence narrated by the victim: Weapon of offence has been recovered from the appellant. The motive of the occurrence is also admitted by the defence and not shattered during cross examination. The learned trial Court has already taken a lenient view in the case and the punishment awarded to the appellant be mentioned in the given circumstance of the case. The learned Dy. Advocate General and the learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Burhan Wali, Advocate relied on PLD 2005 Karachi 177, 2015 YLR 794, 2017 YLR 122 and 2004 PCr. L J 1129.
7. Five accused were sent to stand trial before the learned Sessions Judge Ghizer who after scanning the whole evidence acquitted 3 (three) co-accused extending them the benefit of doubt. The criminal proceeding against Shahzada Alam accused was abated due to his death during trial of the case. The statement of the victim is very material which is reproduced as under:- "Statement of PW-1 On oath Dated:-14-11-2015.
Muhammad Yaqub son of Jamsheed aged about 24 years resident of Bubur, Tehsil Punial District Ghizer.
Stated that on 23-4-2015 on the insist of the accused Tahir I along with the accused went for fishing towards Hasis in two motorcars. On the way in Hasis the accused Manna, Azhar and Tahir were stayed there and I along with accused Shehzada and Rehmat Alain went for fishing. On our way near Hatoon Khari we parked the vehicle and went at towards Khari. In the meantime I went for a natural call. During this time I saw that accused Shahzada has given a knife to accused Rehmat Alam. When I went back from natural call, the accused Rehmat Alam has attacked on me with the knife stating that you have caused loss to us of Rs. 1,50,000/- as well as caused the detention of my brother in jail. Accused Shahzada has captured me and facilitated accused Rehmat Alam to beat me. I received so many knife injuries on my body and became unconscious. in the early morning I was picked up by a person. I was in half conscious. I gain, conscious in the hospital at Gilgit where I was admitted for treatment.
XXX by defence counsel.
It is correct that I am not FIR lodger. It is correct that the report was lodged by accused Shahzada Alam. It is correct that no eye-witness of the occurrence except accused Shahzada Alam. I do not remember that exact time of the occurrence. We left for Hasis from Bubur at about 6.30 p.m. We stayed at Kanchy bridge for about 10/15 minutes. We went to Hasis in friendly mode. My motorcar was driven by accused Tahir. The place of occurrence is open place. It is incorrect to suggest that there will be residential houses near the place of occurrence. I was in conscious for an hour after sustaining injuries. I do not know who has picked me in the morning from the spot of occurrence as I am not full conscious at that time. The son of Shahzada Alam was about 6/7 years of age. It is incorrect that I will be disable by one leg prior to the occurrence. It is incorrect that one year prior to the occurrence I have quarreled with cousin of accused Rehmat Alam and then effected compromise. I have strained terms with accused Shahzada Alam prior to the occurrence. I do not remember the number of the another motorcar. It is in correct that I am naughty person."
8. The reproduction of the above evidence shows that the victim has charged the appellant for stabbing him with a knife and the medico legal report has been exhibited in the trial Court as exhibit PW 6/C. Medical Officer Dr. Ehsanul Haq appeared in witness box as PW-7 and the Medical Officer stated in examination in chief that the patient was A suffering from cauda-equina syndrome (fecal incontinence) due to the injuries cause and the patient has also developed lower limb paralysis due to the injuries. Despite lengthy cross examination nothing favourable could be extracted by the defence in their favour. The weapon of offence has been received from the appellant on his pointation.
9. From perusal of the judgment of learned trial Court, it appears that the impugned judgment has been passed by the learned trial Court which is based upon the sound and valid reasons. The learned defence counsel, failed to point out any material illegality in the impugned judgment which may persuade the mind of the Court to upset the verdict of conviction. The learned trial Court has shown leniency while awarding the sentence of 5 years' RI to the convict/appellant which was not warranted keeping in view the nature of injuries inflicted by the appellant which made the victim incapacitated for whole of his life. The sentence of 5 years' R.I is maintained and the revision petition for enhancement of sentence of imprisonment is dismissed, however the compensation awarded under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. is inadequate which is enhanced from 10,000/- (ten thousand) to 300000/-(three lac) which shall be recovered from the appellant as an arrear of land revenue and shall be paid to the victim as he has been paralyzed for all the time to come. Benefits of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. extended to the appellant shall remain intact.
10. The Criminal Appeal No. 25/2019 filed by the convict/appellant is dismissed and Revision Petition No. 27/2019 filed by the complainant/victim is partially allowed. File be consigned to record after completion.