Manzoor Ahmad, Karim Bakhsh and Faiz Muhammad appellants were convicted and sentenced to suffer five years' R.I. Under section 377, P.P.C. Plus a fine of Rs.10,000 each or in default thereof to undergo six months' R.I. Each on 2-11-1989 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab. It was directed that in case of recovery of fine, it shall be paid to Abdul Karim P.W.6, the victim. It was ordered that benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Shall be given to the appellants. Briefly stated the facts are that case F.I.R. No.13/89 dated 3-3-1989 was registered against the appellants under section 377, P.P.C. Read with section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 on the allegation that Abdul Karim P.W.6 was forcibly subjected to sodomy by the accused on 26-2-1989 while the boy was coming back home from his school. Faiz Muhammad was armed with a ---Chhura---. The prosecution story goes on to say that Abdul Karim was taken to a ditch near the road. He was made naked by Manzoor Ahmad and was forced to lay on the ground. The victim tried to raise an alarm but Manzoor Ahmad shut his mouth with his hands. Karim Bakhsh caught the victim from his arms and thereby facilitated Faiz Muhammad to commit sodomy with him.
Thereafter, turn by turn, the remaining appellants committed the offence. On alarm raised by the victim, Shah Muhammad and Ghulam Muhammad P.Ws. Reached the spot. The witnesses were able to see the appellants while running from the place of occurrence after committing the offence. On receipt of information father of the victim returned home from Lahore where he is employed. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced Muhammad Masood Khan, P.W.1, Ghulam Ali, P.W.2, Dr. Aurangzeb, P.W.3, Muhammad Siddique P.W.4, Ghulam Hussain P.W.5, Abdul Karim P.W.6, Yar Muhammad P.W.7 and Dr. Zafar Manzoor Sheikh P.W.8. Eye-witness account was given by Ghulam Hussain P.W.5 and Abdul Karim P.W.6. Shah Muhammad another eye-witness was given up by the prosecution. Dr. Aurangzeb P.W.3 examined Abdul Karim and found the following injuries on his person:--
(1) Scabbed abrasion 3 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. On inner side right wrist joint.
(2) Scabbed abrasion 5 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. On medial side of left wrist.
2. Investigation of the case was conducted by Yar Muhammad A.S.I. P.W.7. Spot was visited by him.
Site plan Exh.P.H. Was prepared by him. Shalwar of Abdul Karim P.W.6 was also recovered and was taken into possession by the Investigating Officer vide memo. Exh.P.J. Which was witnessed by Ghulam Hussain and Shah Muhammad. Manzoor Ahmad and Karim Bakhsh were arrested by the Investigating Officer on 5-3-1989. Recovery of ---Chhura--- P.1 was effected by the witness on the pointedness of Faiz Muhammad from the Sarkandas which was taken into possession vide memo.
Exh.P.F. And it was witnessed by Maqbool Ahmad and Nisar Ahmad Constables.
3. The appellants while making their statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the commission of any offence. They stated that they had been implicated in the case falsely on account of enmity.
However, no evidence in defence was produced by the appellants.
4. Learned counsel contends that the prosecution has miserably failed to connect the appellants with the commission of the crime. He submits that information was conveyed to the police for registration of a case after delay of 5 days without giving any plausible explanation in that behalf.
He argues that medical examination of Abdul Karim was conducted after 4/5 days and again no explanation was offered for this inordinate delay. Learned counsel stresses that appellants were implicated in the case on account of enmity which was established on record.
5. Learned counsel for the State and complainant submit that offence against the appellants stands proved beyond reasonable doubt. They state that the evidence deposed by Ghulam Hussain P.W.5 and Abdul Karim P.W.6 is enough to convict and sentence the appellants.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have gone through the record with care. I do not find any force in the contentions raised and argued by the learned counsel for the appellants. There is enough evidence available on the record to connect the accused with the commission of the crime. In this behalf reference may be made to the statements made by Ghulam Hussain P.W.5 and Abdul Karim P.W.6. The evidence of Abdul Karim P.W.6 is convincing and certainly inspires confidence. The victim has given the full description of the incident from beginning to the end of the crime. He was coming back from school when in the way he was taken to a ditch and was subjected to sodomy by the appellants turn by turn. On an alarm raised by the victim, Ghulam Hussain P.W.5 reached the spot and saw the appellants while running from the spot. This evidence appears to be true and natural. I have not at all been persuaded to discard the evidence of Abdul Karim P.W. The evidence deposed by Ghulam Hussain P.W.5 also appears to be trustworthy. There is absolutely no ill-will between P.W.5 and the appellants. Learned counsel has failed to point out any enmity existing between the P.W. And the appellants from the evidence on record. Recovery of weapon was also proved beyond doubt by the reliable prosecution witnesses. Medical evidence does corroborate the oral account of Abdul Karim P.W.6 Ghulam Hussain P.W.5. In the circumstances, I am convinced that the appellants were rightly convicted and sentenced on the basis of evidence and law. No case whatsoever for interference has been made out. The appeal being devoid of force is dismissed.