' This jail appeal filed by Muhammad Anwar convict through the jail authorities, Sahiwal, is directed against the judgment, dated 19-11-1990, by which an Additional Sessions Judge at Okara, convicting him under section 302, P.P.C., sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default of its payment to further undergo 6 months' R.I., besides directing to pay a sum of Rs,5,000 as compensation to the heirs of Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) or to further suffer 3 months' S.I. He also convicted him under section 307, P.P.C. And sentenced to 10 years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to further undergo 3 months' R.I. He was, however, held entitled to the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. The prosecution case in brief was that on 30-5-1988 Muhammad Anwar appellant had blamed Muhammad Abbas complainant for committing theft of his water-melons and it had led to an altercation between them. The former bore grudge against the latter on that account. In this background, on the following day at about 10 a.m. When Muhammad Abbas complainant alongwith his brothers Muhammad Aslam, Abdul Ghafoor and Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) was grazing cattle in his land near the tube-well of Abdul co-accused (who died during the trial) in the area of their village Kot Tibha Dakhli Bhutta Mohabat, they were called by him to his tube-well.
When they reached there, Muhammad Sharif (acquitted accused) armed with a hatchet and Muhammad Anwar appellant weilding `Kassi' suddenly appeared on the scene, raising Lalkara'.
Opening the attack, Muhammad Anwar appellant gave two `Kassi' blows on the head of Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) followed by Muhammad Sharif (acquitted co-accused) who gave him a hatchet blow on his head. On receiving these injuries the victim fell down on the ground and when he was lying injured, Abdul co-accused (since dead) gave him `Sota' blow on his chest.
Muhammad Anwar appellant then gave a `Kassi' blow to Muhammad Aslam (P.W.), hitting him on his head, as a result of which he too fell down. Muhammad Sharif (acquitted co-accused) then gave hatchet blow to Abdul Ghafoor (P.W.) on his head and elbow, as a consequence of which he also fell down. Muhammad Abbas complainant tried to rescue his brother but he too was injured by Muhammad Sharif (acquitted accused) with his hatchet, whose . Blows fell on his head and right hand. The complainant, however, succeeded in snatching away the `Sota' from Abdul co- accused (since dead) and in self-defence gave blows with it to Muhammad Anwar appellant.
Meanwhile the alarm raised by the complainant party attracted Muhammad Anwar and Sakandar (P.Ws.) to the spot and they too saw the occurrence. The assailants then made good their escape and took away their respective weapons with them. Muhammad Abbas complainant with the help of Muhammad Anwar and Sakandar (P.Ws.) removed his injured brothers from the spot to his house. On reaching there Manzoor Ahmad succumbed to his injuries. The other injured P.Ws. Were taken to Hujra Hospital for treatment and Muhammad Abbas complainant went to the Police Station Hujra Shah Muqeem where he lodged the report (Exh.P.G) relating to the above-mentioned facts therein.
3. After the registration of the case against the appellant and his co-accused, S.I. Faqir Muhammad took up its investigation and on its completion sent up the appellant and his co-accused for trial.
As already indicated, Abdul co-accused died during the trial and only Muhammad Anwar appellant and his father Muhammad Sharif (acquitted co-accused) faced it. They were charged for committing murder of Manzoor Ahmad and attempted murder of his brothers Abdul Ghafoor, Muhammad Aslam (P.Ws.) and Muhammad Abbas complainant in furtherance of their common intention and on the conclusion of the trial the appellant was convicted and sentenced in the manner aforesaid.
' His father Muhammad Sharif co-accused was acquitted on the benefit of doubt. Aggrieved by the findings, the appellant has come up in appeal before this Court through the Jail Authorities.
4. I have perused the record of the case with the assistance of Mr. Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate, the learned counsel for the State and find that it was, in fact, a case of self-defence. Muhammad Abbas complainant (P.W.7) his injured brother Muhammad Aslam (P.W.3) and Muhammad Anwar (P.W.9) gave the eye-witness account in line with the prosecution story narrated above. S.I. Faqir Muhammad (P.W.13) gave details of the investigation. Dr. Mahmood Afzal (P.W.14) described the injuries of Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) as also of Muhammad Aslam and Abdul Ghafoor (P.Ws.) besides those of Muhammad Abbas complainant. He also examined Muhammad Anwar appellant and had found two injuries---lacerated wound 4 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x bone deep on the right side and top of head besides swelling 8 c.m. x 6 c.m. Around the wound and a lacerated wound 1/2 c.m. x 1/5 c.m. x scalp deep on the right side of head and the swelling 4 c.m. x 4 c.m. Around the bone. Both these injuries were later on declared as simple.
5. The last witness was Dr. Muhammad Afzal Malik, M.S. T.H.Q. Hospital, Depalpur. He had prepared X-Ray report of Abdul Ghafoor P.W. And found a fracture in his skull. Similarly, he had proved the X- Ray of Muhammad Alam (P.W.) detecting a fracture on his head.
6. Muhammad Sharif (acquitted accused) denied his participation in the occurrence. Muhammad Anwar appellant, however, admitting his participation in the occurrence, stated that a day earlier to the occurrence Muhammad Abbas complainant had stolen water-melons by plucking the same from his field situated on the tube-well of Abdul (co-accused) and he had given him beating for so doing and he reported the incident to his brothers, including Manzoor Ahmad (deceased), who on the following day armed with `Dangs' launched a murderous attack on him when he was present at the tube-well of Abdul (co-accused). According to him, Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) gave him `Dang' blow on his head and his brothers started beating him and he, apprehending danger to his life picked up a `Kassi' lying nearby and inflicted with it blows to them with its wrong and sharp sides in order to save his life. He alleged that neither his father Muhammad Sharif nor Abdul co- accused (since dead) was present at the time of occurrence. He produced no defence.
7. The learned trial Judge in the impugned judgment, accepting the appellant's version of the occurrence to the extent that he was attacked by the complainant party annoyed by the incident of altercation taking place between him and Muhammad Abbas complainant a day earlier over the theft of watermelons but held that he exceeded the right of self-defence as his injuries being simple there was no immediate danger to his life. He had suffered two injuries with blunt weapons at the hands of his opponents who came all the way to his Dera' for taking revenge of the incident taking place a day earlier and had presented an imminent danger to his life and he had the right to defend himself at his own place. However, he seems to have exceeded his right of private- defence and in doing so he was also being assisted by his companions as he could not cause fatal injuries to Manzoor Ahmad (deceased) and sizable injuries to his three brothers single-handedly. In these circumstances, his conviction is altered from section 302, P.P.C. To one under section 304, Part A, P.P.C. And he is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 10 years and his fine is reduced from Rs,10,000 to Rs,5,000 or in default of its payment to undergo 6 months' R.I. The amount of compensation payable by him to the heirs of the deceased and the sentence in lieu thereof, as directed by the trial Court, shall remain intact. His conviction under section 307, P.P.C. Is maintained but his sentence is reduced from 10 years' R.I. To 5 years and the fine from Rs,5,000 to Rs,2,000 or in default to further undergo 2 months' R.I. However, both of his substantive sentences shall run concurrently and he shall be entitled to the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The appellant should be informed accordingly through the concerned jail authorities.