Muhammad Sharif son of Wagha made statement Exh.PA. To Muhammad Aslam S.-I. On 25-11-1988 at 12-10 p.m. At Chiniot More. In that, he stated that on 16-11-1988 he was going to the Polling Station which was near his house to cast vote alongwith his sister Mst. Saddan at 11-00 a.m. Iqbal, Nazar, Muhammad, Amir and Farid armed with Sotas came across them and started beating the complainant and Mst. Saddan. Muhammad gave a Sota blow to him on the right hand while Nazar gave a blow on his right arm. Amir gave 3 blows with Sota on his right shoulder and back. When he fell down Farid gave him blows with the Sour on the back. Iqbal also caused him injuries on the buttocks, thighs and knees. When Mst. Saddan fell upon him to save him, Muhammad caused injury on her back while Nazar gave Sota blows on her right arm and left leg. Iqbal and Farid dragged her by holding her hair and Iqbal tore her shirt as a result of which she became naked.
Mary persons came there. His brother Sher Muhammad and others got them rescued by beseeching the accused. He stated that the motive for the occurrence was that he had got a case of theft registered against the accused for which they had been beseeching him to compromise but he had not agreed. He explained that he had not reported the matter earlier as the villagers had been beseeching not to report the occurrence. He also produced his certificate on medical examination and that of Mst. Saddan alongwith the Ex-Ray reports. Sub---Inspector despatched the statement to the Police Station for registration of the case under section 323/354/148/149, P.P.C.
On receipt of which formal F.I.R. Exh.P.D./1 was registered at the Police Station at 12-40 p.m. Bn the same day. During investigation, offence under section 354-A was added on the advice/order of the A.DA. Consequently; the accused were challaned under section 323/354-A, 148/149, P.P.C. As offence under section 354-A was triable by the Court of Session the case was sent up by the Magistrate for trial by a Sessions Court.
2. The accused were tried by Additional. Sessions Judge, Jhang. The learned trial Judge vide judgment dated 29-8-1990 convicted (1) Amir, (2) Farid, (3) Muhammad, (4) Nazar, and (5) Iqbal {{TABLE}} Under section 148:2 years' R.I. each plus a fine of Rs.500 each, in default whereof 6 months' R.I. each.
Under section 323/149:1 year's R.I. each plus a fine of Rs.500 each, in default whereof undergo R.I. for 3 months each.
Under section 354/149:2 years' R.I. each plus a fine of Rs.500 each, in default whereof to undergo R.I. for 6 months each. {{TABLE}} ordered to run concurrently.
3.The convicts have filed appeal.
4. The prosecution had examined 6 P.Ws. At the trial.
5. Dr. Tafneem Haider who had medically examined Muhammad Sharif on 18-11-1988 at 3-30 p.m.
Appeared as P.W.2. He had noted 10 contusions, 3 abrasions, and I swelling on the body of the deceased. All the injuries were opined to have been caused by a blunt weapon and were declared simple.
6. He had also examined Mst. Saddan at 3-35 p.m. On the same day and had noted a swelling, a contusion, and complaint of pain. Injuries were opined to have been caused by a blunt weapon and were declared simple.
7. In both the cases the probable duration was opined to be within three days.
8. Ocular account was deposed to by Muhammad Sharif (P.W.1) and Mst. Saddan (P-W31).
9, Muhammad Sharif while repeating the facts dictated by him in the F.I.R. Made a significant improvement. In that, he stated that the Chadder of Mst. Saddan was also stripped off while being dragged and she had become naked. During cross-examination, he admitted that he was on inimical terms with the accused prior to the occurrence. He admitted that he had instituted a civil suit against Ahmad grandfather of Amir and Farid accused about disputed land. When confronted with his statement Exh.P.D. He was not found to have stated that his sister was stripped off the clothes and she had become quite naked. He admitted that he had not produced Chadder and shirt of his sister to the police. He, however, added that those had been taken away by the accused.
10. Mst. Saddan corroborated the statement made by her brother. During cross-examination, she admitted that she was married 15/16 years prior to the occurrence, but had returned to her parents' house 7/8 years ago due to strained relations with her husband. She admitted that she had not produced her shirt before the police.
11. Both the eye-witnesses denied that they had made incorrect statements.
12. Ghulam Qasim S.H.O./Inspector and Muhammad Aslam S.-I. Who had investigated the case appeared as P.W.5 and P.W.6 and gave details of investigations made by them.
13. The statements of remaining witnesses are more or less of formal nature.
14. All the accused during their statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the prosecution case as a whole and pleaded innocence. None of than made statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C.
15. Learned counsel for the appellants have not challenged the conviction of the appellants under sections 148, 323/149, 354/149, P.P.C. He has, however, prayed for reduction of the sentences to that of already undergone. In that, he contended that the appellants had undergone stress and strains of trial for about two years and had suffered 6-1/2 months' R.I. Also after conviction by the trial Court before being released on bail on suspension of their sentences by this Court.
16. Notwithstanding the fact that the learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the conviction of the appellants, I have gone through the evidence and I am convinced that the prosecution had successfully proved the case against the appellants. The conviction of the appellants under sections 148, 323/149 and 354/149, P.P.C. Appears to be well placed and does not call for any interference. The same is, therefore, maintained.
17. The case was registered in November, 1988. The trial continued, till 29-8-1990. Thus the appellants underwent stress and strains of trial for about two years. They were taken into custody on 29-8-1990. Their sentences were suspended and they were directed to be released on bail vide order dated 10-3-1991 of this Court which means that before being released they had undergone 6-1/2 months' R.I. Each. Mst. Saddan was a married lady. It does not appear from anything on record that any of the appellants had anything more in their mind than the offence they were found to have been committed. I feel sentence of imprisonment already undergone plus the sentence of fines imposed by the trial Court will meet the ends of justice. Order accordingly.
18. The appellants are on bail. They shall deposit the amount of fines within 45 days. In case alf or anyone of them fails to deposit the fine within the stipulated period they/he shall be caused to be arrested through non-bailable warrants and lodged in jail to undergo the sentences awarded in lieu of non-payment of fines. Learned counsel for the appellants had undertaken to inform the appellants to deposit the fines. Intimation shall, however, be sent by the office also.