This petition for revision is directed against the order, dated 10th February, 1986 whereby a private complaint under sections 147 and 323, P.P.C., instituted by Abdur Rashid petitioner, was dismissed under section 205, Cr.P.C.
2. On 9th April, 1984 Abdur Rashid petitioner instituted a complaint under sections 147 and 323, P.P.C.
Against Islam-ud-Din. Abdul Sattar, Mukhtiar. Mst. Rukhsana, Mst. Satara and Mst. Aisha wherein it was alleged that on 24th February, 1984 Mukhtiar respondent was quarrelling with Javed, the grandson of Mst. Nurian; she asked Mukhtiar not to quarrel, and in the meantime Mst. Rukhsana and Aisha came there. Mst. Aisha pulled the hair of Mst. Nurian and made her to fall on the ground.
Then Mst. Aisha and Mst. Satara gave fist blows to Mst. Nurian, as a result of which her teeth got broken. Thereafter, Mukhtiar, Rukhsana and Satara gave fist and kick blows to Mst. Nurian; Islam-- ud-Din respondent hurled a stone on Malha, husband of Mst. Nurian, causing injury on his forehead and then Abdul Sattar respondent inured his hand by teeth-biting. Litigation between the parties was stated to be the motive for the offence.
3. The learned Magistrate recorded the preliminary evidence comprising statements of Abdur Rashid complainant and Bashir Ahmad P.W. In para. 3 of this petition it is stated that the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint by his order, dated 12-2-1986. Perusal of the file, however, reveals that this dismissal order was passed in the second round; firstly, the complaint was dismissed on 17-6-1984. This order was challenged in revision which was allowed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhakkar, and the case was sent back with the direction that all the evidence of the complainant he recorded and case be decided afresh in accordance with law. These facts do not find any mention in this petition nor were brought to my notice at the time of preliminary hearing.
On 8th January, 1986 the complainant produced a copy of Report No. 11 of Daily Diary dated 24th February, 1984, P.S. Darya Khan, and closed his evidence. The learned Magistrate, vide his order, dated 10-2-1986, again dismissed the complaint under section 203, Cr.P.C.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The grounds which weighed with the learned Magistrate for dismissing the complaint were that the statements of the alleged eye-witnesses were contradictory and at variance with the medical evidence; the complainant party was inimical towards the accused; and Mst. Nurian who was the star witness of the complainant, was not examined. Having gone through the record I find that, the observations made by the learned Magistrate have the support of evidence. The medicolegal report of Mst. Nurian shows that her upper and lower jaws were examined. She had three injuries on her person; (1) A lacerated contused wound in the socket of lateral right incisor of upper jaw; (2) A lacerated wound in the socket of left lateral incisor of upper jaw; and (3) two small abrasions on right hand. She was examined on the very day of occurrence at 11-45 p. m. According to her medicolegal report, duration of injuries Nos. 1 and 2 was more than three days and that of No. 3 about eight hours, meaning thereby that wounds in the sockets were not sustained during the occurrence but were received more than three days before that. The allegation in the complaint and the statement of Bashir Ahmad P.W. That teeth of Mst. Nurian got broken due to fist blows is, therefore, false. There were three injuries on Malha P.W. These had been caused within about eight hours. There was one injury of the same duration on Mst. Nurian. For these four injuries six persons were implicated. They included Islam-ud-Din, his wife, his two sons and two daughters.
The order of the learned Magistrate is not open to any exception. There is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed.