' Ramzan petitioner, Muhammad Yusuf and Bashir alias Allah Bakhsh were tried under section 324/34, P.P.C. By Abdul Hamid Khan, Magistrate First Class, Multan, who, by this judgment, dated 30- 12-1979, acquitted Muhammad Yusuf of the charge but convicted Ramzan and Bashir alias Allah Bakhsh and sentenced them to one year's rigorous imprisonment each. On appeal, the conviction and sentence of Bashir alias Allah Bakhsh was set aside and he was acquitted of the charge. The conviction of the petitioner was, however, maintained but his sentence was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. He has come up in revision to question the correctness and propriety of the aforesaid orders.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 12th May, 1978 at about 11 a.m. Acquitted accused Bashir alias Allah Bakhsh caught hold of Manzur P.W. Acquitted accused Muhammad Yusuf gave him a Lathi blow on his back and Muhammad Ramzan petitioner inflicted a hatchet blow on his head as a result of which he fell down unconscious. The occurrence was witnessed by Pathana and Allah Bakhsh P.Ws. A money dispute between Manzur Hussain and Muhammad Ramzan petitioner is stated to be the motive for the offence.
3. On 13th May, 1978 Manzur Hussain P.W. Was medically examined by Dr. Iqbal Ahmad, Medical Officer, Nishtar Hospital, Multan, who found an incised wound 14" x 4" x bone deep on left top of head. The injury was kept under observation and later on declared simple in nature.
4. The petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charge, denied the prosecution allegations against him and contended that he had been falsely implicated due to enmity. He examined Ghulam Haider in his defence who stated that there was a water dispute between the parties but no occurrence of the type ever took place. Falak Sher (D.W.2) and Major Imtiaz Hussain (D.W.3) pleaded alibi for acquitted accused Yusuf.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the F.I.R. Was lodged 30 hours after the occurrence and the complainant gained sufficient time for deliberation. He further submits that two out of the three accused have already been acquitted by the Court below on the same evidence and there is no corroboration against the petitioner, therefore his conviction and sentence is also unsustainable.
6. I have gone through the record with the help of the learned counsel for the parties. The F.I.R. Was lodged by Wahid Bakhsh who is not an eye-witness of the occurrence. He is father of Manzur Hussain injured. The occurrence took place on 12th May, 1978 at 11 a.m. And the F.I.R. Was lodged on the next day, i,e, 13th May, 1978 at 6-05 p.m. The medico-legal report shows that Manzur Hussain injured was examined on the very day of occurrence at 3-30 p.m. At Multan. The F.I.R. Could conveniently be lodged on the same day at Police Station Saddar Multan. The delay in the F.I.R. Has thus not been explained.
7. There are three eye-witnesses, of the occurrence, namely, Manzur Hussain injured, Pathana and Allah Bakhsh. Pathana is the real brother of the, complainant and Allah Bakhsh is his nephew.
Besides their close relationship with the complainant, they are chance-witnesses of the occurrence. Wahid Bakhsh complainant admitted in cross-examination that these witnesses reside at Chah Kothiwala situate at a distance of two or two and a half acres from the spot. Even otherwise, their evidence does not inspire confidence. Pathana P.W. Stated that the occurrence took place at Peshi-Degarwela whereas Allah Bakhsh and Manzur Hussain stated that it took place at 11 or 12 a.m. All the three eye-witnesses are unanimous that Ramzan and Yusuf gave hatchet and stick blow, respectively, to Manzur Hussain P.W. With full force. The medical evidence, however, shows that Manzur Hussain had only bone injury on his person caused by a sharp-edged weapon.
In this view of the matter, it can safely be inferred that acquitted accused Muhammad Yusuf was falsely implicated and for that reason it would be unsafe to place reliance on the ocular evidence against the petitioner unless corroborated through an unimpeachable source. No such corroboration is, however, available in this case. The learned Additional Sessions Judge was of the view that the statement of Manzur Hussain was corroborated by Pathana and Allah Bakhsh P.Ws.
And the medical evidence. As already stated above, Pathana and Allah Bakhsh are relation/chance witnesses and their evidence does not inspire confidence. The medical evidence, too, does not furnish any corroboration because the F.I.R. Was lodged after obtaining the medico- legal report when the complainant and the police officer concerned were well-aware of the nature of the injury and the weapon employed. In the circumstances, I am of the view that it would be unsafe to maintain the conviction of the petitioner on the evidence of the aforementioned eye- witnesses.
8. I, therefore, allow this petition, set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner and acquit him of the charge. He is on bail. He shall be discharged from his bail bond.