' MUHAMMAD MUINR KHAN, J.-- This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Judge, Punjab Special Court for Speedy Trials No, VI, Bahawalpur, whereby he on 24-10-1988, acquitted Zahoor Ahmad, Muhammad Ameer, Muhammad Ramzan and Riaz Ahmad respondents of the charges under section 395/397/316/412/171/148/149/459, P.P.C.
2. The occurrence took place on 15-5-1988 at Sehiwela in the house of Muhammad Azeem situate in Chak No, 286/H.R., Mir Garh Road, Bahawalnagar. The F.I.R. Exh.P.N. Was lodged by Muhammad Azeem P.W.9 at 3-00 a.m. On the same day at Police Station Fort Abbas.
3. The prosecution case is that at the eventful time Mst. Jeewan Mai P.W.5, Allah Rakha P.W.6, Muhammad Sharif P.W.7 and Muhammad Azeem P.W.9 were sleeping in the courtyard of their house when six persons including three in the police uniform variously armed came there. They caught hold of the persons sleeping in the house, belabored them and tied them with clothes. On this the aforementioned P.Ws. Raised alarm which attracted Din Muhammad (not produced) to the spot. One of the culprits, who was dressed in the uniform of Hawaldar fired shot from his gun which hit Din Muhammad, who fell down. The culprits broke open the rooms of the house and forcibly took away ornaments of gold and silver and Rs,3,000 of Allah Rakha P.W. They snatched watch from Muhammad Azeem complainant and ran away taking the weapons with them.
4. During investigation, the police arrested the four respondents. Zahoor Ahmad respondent got recovered ear-ring of gold Exh.P.15 and two Karras of silver Exh.P.16/1-2, vide memo. Exh.P.J.
Muhammad Ramzan respondent got recovered Pazaib of silver Exh.P.17/1-2 and Kant of gold Exh.P.18 vide memo. Exh.P.K. Riaz Ahmad respondent got recovered two Karas of silver Exh.P.19/1-2 and wrist watch Exh.P.21 vide memo. Exh.P.L. Muhammad Ameer respondent got recovered Pazaib of silver Exh.P.20/1-2 vide memo. Exh.P.M. The golden and silver ornaments recovered from the respondents, belong to Allah Rakha P.W.6. The recovery memoranda were attested by Muhammad Sharif P.W.7 and Zia Feroz, S.H.O., P.W.10. At the time of the arrest of Zahoor Ahmad respondent, bag Exh.P.1 containing .12 bore gun Exh.P.2, uniform of police constable Exh.P.3/1-2, uniform of head constable Exh.P.4, torch Exh.P.5, iron rod Exh.P.6, name plate Exh.P.7, two wrist watches Exh.P.8 and P.9, four live cartridges Exh.P.10/1-4, four empty cartridges Exh.P.11 /1-4 and six pellets Exh.P.12/1-6 were recovered and were taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.H attested by Muhammad Aslam P.W.4 and Zia Feroz S.H.O. P.W.10. At the time of the arrest of Riaz Ahmad respondent pistol Exh.P.13, two live cartridges Exh.P.14/1-2 were recovered during personal search. At the time of the arrest of Ameer respondent, one pistol and two cartridges were recovered from him. In the identification parade held under the supervision of Sardar Khadim Hussain, Tehsildar, P.W.2, the eye-witnesses correctly identified the four respondents.
5. To prove its case, prosecution produced 10 witnesses. Dr. Muhammad Afzal P.W.1 had medically examined Muhammad Sharif, Allah Rakha, Mst. Jcewan Mai and Muhammad Azeem P.Ws. On 15-5- 1988. He found 2 simple injuries caused by blunt weapon on the person of Muhammad Sharif, one simple injury caused by blunt weapon on the person of Allah Rakha P.W. 6 simple injuries caused by blunt weapon on the person of Mst. Jeewan Mai P.W. And one simple injury caused by blunt weapon on the person of Muhammad Azeem complainant. He found 4 fire-arm wounds on the person of Din Muhammad P.W. (not produced). Out of the injuries found on his person, one was declared grievous and the remaining as simple. He proved the medico-legal reports Exhs. P.A., P.B., P.C., P.D. And P.F. Mst. Jeewan Mai P.W.5, Allah Rakkha P.W.6, Muhammad Sharif P.W.7 and Muhammad Azeem P.W.9 have given the ocular account of the occurrence. They claim to have seen the four respondents and their co-accused committing robbery in their house. They have fully supported the prosecution case as detailed above. According to them Zahoor Ahmad was dressed in the uniform of Hawaldar and was carrying gun at the time of occurrence. Riaz Ahmad was dressed in the uniform of Foot Constable and was carrying pistol. Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Ameer respondents were armed with Dangs. They further stated that they had correctly identified the respondents in the identification parade. Muhammad Aslam P.W.4, Muhammad Sharif P.W.7 and Zia Feroz S.H.O. P.W.10 have supported the recoveries of ornaments and fire-arm, etc. From the respondents. Sardar Khadim Hussain, Tehsildar has proved the identification report Exh.P.G./2, which was prepared by him at the time of identification parade. He stated that the prosecution witnesses had correctly identified the respondents in the parade. The rest of the evidence is of formal nature.
6. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., the respondents denied all the incriminating circumstances. They did not produce evidence in defence.
7. Disbelieving the ocular evidence and the evidence of the incriminating recoveries from the respondents, the trial Court has acquitted the respondents as stated above.
8. The learned Assistant Advocate-General contended that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the respondents beyond shadows of doubt; that the eyewitnesses had no enmity to involve the respondents falsely in the case; that the trial Court has not given convincing reasons for disbelieving the prosecution evidence and that the acquittal has resulted in grave injustice.
9. We have carefully attended to the arguments of the learned A.A.-G. In the light of the evidence on record and the circumstances appearing in the case. We do not agree with him. We find that the respondents were not previously known to the 4 eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution; that the eye-witnesses claim to have identified the culprits in the light of the lantern. In the F.I.R., it has not been stated that the lantern was burning in the house at the time of occurrence or that the witnesses had identified the culprits in the light of the lantern. The presence of the lantern has not been stated in the statements of the eye-witnesses recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C.; that the lantern was not recovered from the spot by the police; that the report Exh.P.G./2 prepared by Sardar Khadim Hussain P.W.2 at the time of identification is entirely vague. It does not contain precautions taken by the Magistrate at the time of identification to ensure correct identification of the culprits. The identification parade has been conducted in violation of the directions given in the relevant High Court Rules and Orders. The guide-lines given by the superior Courtrs in this respect have also been ignored by the Magistrate. That being the position no implicit reliance can be placed on the identification parade held by the Magistrate. As for the charges under section 395/397/459/316/171/148/149, P.P.C., the fate of the case entirely hinges upon the identification of the respondents at the time of occurrence. In the circumstances of the case, the statements of the eye-witnesses with regard to the identification of the respondents cannot be accepted as a gospel truth. The identification proceedings conducted by the Magistrate/Tehsildar being defective and unreliable, there is no circumstantial certainty of the identification of the respondents by the eye- witnesses at the time of occurrence. It has been repeatedly held by the superior Courts that the evidence of identity based on personal impressions should be approached by the Court with utmost caution especially when the whole case hinges upon such evidence. In the instant case, the respondents were not previously known to the witnesses. There were six dacoits. In the absence of satisfactory identification parade it can hardly be believed that the eye-witnesses could memorize the faces of six persons whom they had seen in the moment of confusion. Taking up the charge under section 412, P.P.C., we find that the respondents do not reside in district Bahawalnagar. They reside in different districts of Punjab Province. Since they could easily take the silver and golden ornaments and the watches to their districts, there seems to be no fun in burying the same within the limits Of District Bahawalnagar wherefrom the property was subsequently recovered on their potation, by the police. It seems to us that in order to connect the respondents with the crime, the recoveries have been planted upon them. The trial Court has applied its conscious mind to the relevant evidence and has given sound and cogent reasons in support of the conclusions arrived at by it. It is well-settled that once an accused person is acquitted of the charge, then strong and exceptional grounds would be required for interfering with the same, which we do not see in the present case.
' For what has been said above, there being no merit, the appeal is dismissed in limine.