' This criminal Appeal by the State against acquittal arises from the judgment of learned Magistrate Section 30 Mianwali, whereby he on 11-11-1970 acquitted Mst. Nasim Akhtar and Mst. Razia respondents of charges under section 457/325/34, P.P.C.
2. The prosecution case was that on 31-8-1969 at 8-00 p.m., the respondents after having committed criminal trespass into the house of Mst. Mehr Khatoon, gave her beating with fists and kicks resulting in grievous as well as simple injuries on her person.
3. To prove its case prosecution examined 6 witnesses. Mrs. Ghulam Rasool, Women Medical Officer, examined Mst. Mehr Khatoon on 4-2-1970. She found a swelling in the area of 5" x 6" on the left hip. Th X-Ray of the injury revealed the fracture of left pubic bone. Mst Mehr Khatoon, P.W.2, deposed that the respondents entered in her house at the time of occurrence.
Mst. Razia respondent caught hold of her and Mst. Nasim Akhtar gave kicks on her left thigh. Ms'.
Aziz Khatoon and Mst. Murad Khatoon supported the statement made by Mst. Mehr Khatoon. The rest of the evidence is of formal nature.
4. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The counsel for the respondents was who was allowed to appear on behalf of the respondents whose personal appearance had been exempted, denied all the incriminating circumstances. In defence no witness was produced.
5. The learned trial Court while acquitting the respondents has stated in the judgment that:- "In view of the facts that the prosecution case suffers from inordinate delay, is not supported by independent P.Ws. And even the corroboration by the medical evidence is not convincing. I hold that the case against the accused is not proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt."
6. Learned counsel for the State/appellant submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the respondents; that Mst. Mehr Khatoon had no enmity to involve them falsely; that Mst. Aziz Khatoon, P.W.3, and Mst. Murad Khatoon, P.W.4, who are independent witnesses had supported Mst. Mehr Khatoon and that the reasons given by the trial Court for the acquittal are not cogent. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the trial Court.
7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. I find that there was a delay of 8 days in lodging the F.I.R. And that no satisfactory explanation for this inordinate delay could be given by the prosecution. The trial Court has properly appreciated the testimony of the eye- A witnesses and has given sound reasons for not placing reliance o their statements. The learned trial Court was very much in doubt a to the presence of Mst. Aziz Khatoon P.W.3 and Mst. Murad Khatoo P.W.4 at the time of occurrence. Had Mst. Aziz Khatoon P.W.3 and Mst. Murad Khatoon P.W.4 who were closely related to Mst. Mehr Khatoon P.W.2 been present there, they would have interfered and apprehended the two ladies on the spot or at least they would have also given fists and Kicks blows to them. It is well-settled that once an accused person is acquitted, strong and exceptional grounds would be required for interference with the judgment of acquittal which I do not see in the case in hand.
8. For what has been stated above, there being no merit, the appeal is dismissed.