1. ' This appeal is directed agaisnt the judgment dated 30th of April, 1985 passed by Magistrate 1st Class, Jauharabad, convicting the appellants under section 452/354/506/34, P.P.C. Muhammad Amir appellant was sentenced to three years' R.I. While the latter two were sentenced to two years'
2. R.I. Each under section 452, P.P.C. In the remaining two counts they all were sentenced to one year's R.I. Each under each count. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. ' Prosecution case in brief is that an F.I.R. Exh.PA./1 was got recorded on the statement Exh.PA. Of Mst.
4. Nasim Akhtar (P.W.1) on 20th of August, 1984 at Police Station Mitha. Tiwana District Sargodha, for an occurrence stated to have taken place on 18-8-1984. The complainant was all alone in her house and was sewing the clothes when Muhammad Amir accused-appellant went on the roof of his house and started teasing and showing handkerchief to her. He was making signs to attract her attention. At this behaviour she rebuked him whefeupon Muhammad Amir appellant, who was having gun in his hand alongwith other appellants, who were his real brothers, trespassed into her house by breaking Sarkanda wall. He caught hold the breast of the complainant and dragged her with the assistance of co-accused. In this process her clothes were torn. The appellants were arrested. After usual investigation the challan was submitted.
5. ' The prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses to establish the count/case. The ocular account in this case has been stated by complainant Nasim Akhtar (P.W.1), Fateh Bibi (P.W.2) and Ghulam Shabbi! (P.W.3) implicating the appellants. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants does not press the conviction of the appellant No,1 Muhammad Amir seriously. As far as appellants Nos.2 and 3 Muhammad Nazir and Ghulam Rasul are concerned it is contended that they have been implicated falsely and nothing has been brought against them on the record. There is considerable delay of two days in recording of the F.I.R. Even otherwise not a single independent witness has been produced. The evidence, according to him, is full of replet with improvements.
6. ' I have considered the contentions and have gone through the entire evidence with the assistance of the learned counsel. It is noticed that Muhammad Amir apart from his under-trial incarceration has undergone more than one year and three months substantive part of his sentence. Keeping in view the nature of allegations and the fact that the occurrence took place as far back as in the year 1984 I am of the view that the ends of justice would be fully met if the sentence of Muhammad Amir is altered to that of the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, appeal qua him is dismissed with the above modification. As far as Muhammad Nazir and Ghulam Rasul appellants are concerned, they have simply been implicated being brothers of Muhammad Amir appellant who is the main culprit. There is even otherwise nothing against them on the record and no indepndent witness has come forward to support their implication. It is also come on record that both the appellants Muhammad Nazir and Ghulam Rasul are crippled and the allegations that they helped the main accused Muhammad Amir in dragging Mst. Nasim Akhtar do not get much support from the record. Even the learned State counsel has not seriously brought anything to my notice qua their implication in this offence. Accordingly, their appeal is accepted and they are acquitted of all the charges. The appellants are on bail and they are released from bail bonds.