Jalal Khan and Sardar Khan appellants were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab, on the charge of committing offences punishable under sections 307, 353 and 332/34, P.P.C. For having attempted at the lives of Ziaullah Khan and Amanullah Khan Police Constables on 5-6-1990 in the area of Police Station Noorpur Thal when the latter, as members of a police party in search of the culprits in a case of highway robbery (Haraba), had happened to have an encounter with the former, who, in their efforts to escape from the scene of incident, caused them injuries with Chhuries but were ultimately over--powered.
2. On the conclusion of the trial the learned trial Judge, vide his judgment, dated 15-12-1990, however, convicted them under section 324/34, P.P.C. And sentenced each of them to two years' R.I.
And a fine of Rs.2,000 or in default to further undergo three months' R.I. He also convicted them under section 353, P.P.C. And sentenced them to two years' R.I. And a fine of Rs.2,000 without indicating the sentence in lieu thereof. Their substantive sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently and they were held entitled to the benefits of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
3. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that all the prosecution witnesses were police officials and without independent corroboration by any witness from public, the conviction of the appellants, on their testimony, was not sustainable. According to the learned counsel, if the appellants, as alleged by the prosecution, were armed with Chhuries and they used the same during the scuffle with the police constables, they would not have caused superficial injuries to them. It is contended that the appellants were falsely implicated in this case in order to strengthen the main case of highway robbery against them.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State is of the view that appellants were rightly convicted and sentenced, particularly when the injuries on the persons of the constables, as per testimony of the Medical Officer, were neither self-suffered nor caused by a friendly hand.
5. Incident of highway robbery, in which a motor taxi engaged by the appellants and their co- accused was forcibly snatched by them at a deserted place during the journey at night and was recovered by the police on the following day after an encounter with the police, resulted in the registration of two separate cases, one under 17 of Ordinance VI of 1979 and the other of attempted murder coupled with obstruction in the performance of official duty. Both the cases were tried by the same Court, ultimately resulting in conviction of the appellants besides one other in the former case and also of the appellants in the latter case giving rise to this appeal. As the incident took place by the side of a deserted road away from any habitation, it was obviously to be witnessed by the members of the police party engaged in the encounter with the appellants and by none else.
Therefore, there could be no possibility of the same having been seen by any member of the public. In these circumstances the prosecution case does not suffer from any legal infirmity merely on the ground that the witnesses therein were only the police officials and none else.
6. The `Chhuras' may be of sufficient dimension but it is not necessary that the weapons bigger in size must inevitably cause serious or grievous injuries. There is, therefore, no force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that the extent and the nature of the injuries on the persons of the constables was not commensurate with the size of the weapon used. The prosecution case, in my opinion, stood proved against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubt and they were rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court. There is, therefore, no force in the appeal and the same is dismissed. To avoid any possible confusion it may be clarified here that the sentence of Jalal Khan', and Sardar Khan, in both the cases referred to above, shall run consecutively.
7. The appellants, who are in the prison, should be informed accordingly through the jail authorities concerned.