' Mushtaq Ahmad and Muhammad Rafiq petitioners were convicted by Mr. Muhammad Naeem Siddiqui, Magistrate, First Class, Narowal, under sections 377 and 377/109, P.P.C. Respectively, and were sentenced to two years and one year's R.I. Respectively, by judgment dated 15th September, 1975. They filed an appeal against their conviction and sentence but the same was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, by his judgment dated 4th August, 1977. Now they have come up in revision to question the correctness and propriety of the aforesaid orders.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has informed me that Muhammad Rafiq petitioner has served out the entire sentence awarded to him. His petition has, therefore, become infructuous.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 20th December, 1974 at about Degarwela Sakhawat Ali complainant, aged 14, was going towards his wheat crop in order to have a round of the same. When he reached near the tube-well of Ghulam Rasul, both the petitioners asked him to come in the Kotha of the tube-well but he refused to do so whereupon they forcibly took him inside the said Kotha. Rafiq petitioner put a piece of cloth on his mouth and Mushtaq petitioner started committing sodomy with him On the alarm of the complainant Abdul Ghafur and Abdul Ghani got attracted and on seeing them approach the petitioners fled away from the spot. The complainant then went to his house but his father was not there. On the following morning he accompanied by his father went to Civil Dispensary, Baddo Malli, where he was medically examined by Dr. Muhammad Hussain, who found an abrasion on the anus extending well into the mucous at 3 O'clock position. He also found blood and other stains on the Dhoti of the complainant. The doctor opined that sodomy had been committed with the complainant. The Dhoti was sent to the Chemical Examiner and his report is to the effect that the same was stained with semen. The occurrence was reported to the police by the complainant at Police Station Rayya on 23rd December, 1974 at 9-50 a.m.
4. In support of its case the prosecution examined three eye-witnesses, namely, Abdul Ghani, Abdul Ghafur and Sakhawat Ali and it also relied on the medical evidence and the report of the Chemical Examiner.
5. The petitioners pleaded not guilty to the charge and contended that the had been falsely implicated. Musthaq petitioner examined three witnesses in his defence.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that Abdul Ghani and Abdul Ghafur did not support the prosecution in the trial Court and the solitary statement of Sakhawat Ali complainant was not sufficient for conviction because he had admitted that his family was on inimical terms with the petitioners. In the grounds of revision it is stated that the parties are on good terms and the complainant had orally stated before the Additional Sessions Judge that the petitioners had not committed any offence. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the parties have compromised and the complainant may be examined by this Court. The offence under section 377, P.P.C. Is not compoundable and the complainant cannot be examined, at this stage because such a course would be wholly unwarranted. The statement of the complainant finds full corroboration from the medical evidence and the report of the Chemical Examiner. The medical witness clearly stated that sodomy had been committed with the complainant. The report of the Chemical Examiner has further confirmed that the Dhoti of the complainant was stained with semen. In the circumstances the statement of the complainant was rightly accepted by the Courts below. On provisional side this Court can interfere only in exceptional circumstances, but no such circumstances are available in this case. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.