' Irshad Ullah and Bashir Ahmad petitioners were convicted by Mr. Zaffar Aziz Chaudhary, Magistrate Section 30 Hafizabad upper section 429/34, P.P.C. And were sentenced to 3 months' R.I.
Each on P4-1979. The appeal of the petitioners was heard and dismissed by the learned, Sessions Judge, Gujranwala on 12-8-1979. The allegations against the petitioners Were that they caught hold of a young offspring of a camel and tied him with a rope. Thereafter they strangulated the animal and further Irshad Ullah petitioner inflicted hatchet injuries on its back. As a result of these injuries, the animal died at the spot. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced, Haji Nawazish Ali P.W.1, Manzoor P.W.2, Ramzan P.W.3, Ghafoor P.W.4, Saeed Ahmad Gondal, A.S.I. P.W.5 and Dr. Ziaul Hag, Veterinary Officer, Qila Didar Singh P.W.6. The petitioners while making statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the allegations levelled against them and they pleaded innocence.
2. At the very outset the learned counsel for the petitioners says that Bashir Ahmad petitioner No.2 has died on 12-6-1989. The learned State counsel is unable to rebut the fact of death of the said petitioner. In the circumstances, the revision petition to the extent of Bashir Ahmad petitioner has become infructuous and as such is dismissed.
3. The learned counsel has forcefully contended that the allegation leveled against Irshad Ullah petitioner was that he caused hatchet injury on the person of the young animal and as a result thereof, he died at the spot. My attention has been drawn to the statement made by Dr. Ziaul Haq P.W.6, Veterinary Officer, Oda Didar Singh, which shows that there was no hatchet injury on the person of the young camel. It was clearly admitted by the said witness in his cross-examination that he did not notice any injury by a sharp-edged weapon on the person of the animal and that the sole cause of the death was strangulation. I have scrutinized the prosecution evidence. I fully agree with the contention raised and argued by the learned counsel that death of the animal occurred on account of strangulation with rope and that the medical evidence does not support the ocular account regarding infliction of the hatchet injuries by Irshad Ullah petitioner. This being so, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against petitioner Irshad Ullah. I find that the medical evidence is not in line with the ocular account provided by the prosecution witnesses.
The learned State counsel was unable to support the conviction and sentence recorded against petitioner Irshad Ullah. In the circumstances, I proceed to set aside the conviction and sentence of petitioner Irshad Ullah and acquit him. This revision petition is, therefore, allowed to this extent. The petitioner is on bail. His bail bond shall stand discharged.