' ABAID ULLAH KHAN, J.--- Muhammad Hanif alias Bhutto, son of Rehmat Ali, caste Ansari, aged 24 years, powerloom worker, resident of Street No,7, Mohallah Sultanpura, Gujranwala, has preferred this appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 23rd July, 1990, whereby he was convicted of the commission of offence of Zina-bilJabr and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and thirty stripes of whipping. He was given benefit of the provisions of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the purpose of adjustment of the period of his detention during trial of the case against the term of imprisonment. He is on notice issued by this Court to show cause as to why the sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court be not enhanced.
2. The facts of the prosecution version of the case laid against the appellant are these. At about 7 o'clock in the evening of the 28th December, 1988, Mst. Razia Bibi, P.W.3, 10/11 years old daughter of Lal Din, P.W.4, resident of Mohallah Ghulampura, Gujranwala, went out of her house but did not return home after the lapse of quite some time causing concern to her father who went out in search of her. At about 7-30 p.m., he heard the weeping sound of Mst. Razia Bibi emanating from the house of Mst. Safia Bibi, sister of the appellant. Accompanied by Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif, Mst. Razia Bibi's father, Lal Din, P.W.4, went inside the house of Mst. Safia Bibi and found the appellant committing Zina-bil-Jabr with Mst. Razia Bibi in the room of the house. Mst. Razia Bibi was found weeping. The appellant, seeing Lal Din and his companions, ran away. An unsuccessful attempt was made to catch him by Lal Din and his colleagues. The condition of Mst. Razia Bibi being precarious she was taken to the Civil Hospital, Gujranwala, where she was got admitted. Lal Din proceeded to Police Station Garjakh where he lodged the report, Exh.PA. At 12-30 a.m. On the 29th December, 1988. Muhammad Hanif, Sub-Inspector of Police and Station House Officer, Police Station Garjakh, P.W.5, recorded the first information report and thereafter went to the spot and searched for the accused but could not get him as he was not available over there. He visited the hospital and got Mst. Razia Bibi examined by Lady Doctor Robina Malik, Women Medical Officer, District Headquarters Hospital, Gujranwala, P.W.7, at 2-50 a.m. He arrested the appellant on the 31st December, 1988 and got him medically examined by Doctor Abdul Aziz Tarar, Casualty Medical Officer, District Headquarters Hospital, Gujranwala, P.W.6, the next day.
3. Lady Doctor Robinba Malik P.W.7, did not find any mark of violence on the body of Mst. Razia Bibi.
She noticed a scar 1 c.m. In size at 6 o'clock position on the perineum. Her hymen was torn and was bleeding profusely. Vagina admitted one finger loosly. Uterus size could not be assessed as the victim felt severe pain. The lady doctor took four vaginal swabs and alongwith Shalwar of Mst. Razia Bibi sent them on to the Chemical Examiner for the Punjab, Lahore, for detection of semen. She opined that if the report of the Chemical Examiner regarding swabs and Shalwar was in the positive it was a case of rape. As per report of the Chemical Examiner, Exh.P.E. The vaginal swabs and Shalwar were found to be stained with semen. Exh.P.D. Is the copy of the medico-legal examination report of the lady doctor.
4. Doctor Abdul Aziz Tarrar, P.W.6, certified potency of the appellant to commit sexual intercourse.
Exh.P.C. Is the copy of his report in this behalf.
5. The appellant denied having committed Zina-bil-Jabr with Mst. Razia Bibi. He described the case against him to be a false one. He explained that the complainant, Lal Din, P.W.4, had purchased cloth worth Rs,5,000 on credit from the factory where he had been working, that he had paid Rs,2,000 and when he had demanded the balance of Rs,3,000 an altercation had taken place with him and on that account he had got him involved falsely in the case. He did not like to give evidence on oath. Though in the first instance he said that he would produce evidence in defence but later on abandoned the idea of adducing such evidence.
6. The direct ocular evidence in proof of the charge levelled against the appellant consists of the depositions of Mst. Razia Bibi, P.W.3 and her father, Lal Din, P.W.4. The prosecution did not produce Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif who were said to have witnessed the occurrence alongwith Lal Din for their having been won over by the appellant. Narrating how the appellant had allured and taken her to the house of his sister (Mst. Safia Bibi), Mst. Razia Bibi testified that at about 6-00 p.m., she had gone or t of her house and had seen the appellant standing in the street in front of the house of his sister, Mst. Safia Bibi. She added that the appellant had asked her that his sister, Safia Bibi, had been calling her that she had gone inside the house and had seen that his sister, Mst. Safia Bibi had not been present in the house. Continuing her statement she said that appellant had told her that his sister had gone to Gali No,7. She further stated that she was just to come back when the appellant had taken her in his Japha and took her inside the room and had laid her on the bed, had forcibly put off her Shalwar and committed Zina with her. She bore out that she had started weeping and hearing her alarm her father, Lal Din, Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif had been attracted to that place and seeing them the appellant had fled away. She confirmed that she had narrated the whole occurrence to her father, Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif, that they had taken her to the Civil Hospital, Gujranwala, and got her medically examined.
7. According to the evidence given by Lal Din, P.W.4, after her daughter, Mst. Razia Bibi, who had gone out of the house at about 7-00 p.m., had not returned after about half an hour he had gone out and searched for her in all the houses in the street (wherein lay the house of the complainant and that of the appellant's sister, Mst. Safia Bibi, the venue of occurrence). He added that initially he had carried out search all alone and then Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif had also accompanied him in conducting search. He further stated that after searching for about ten to fifteen minutes he had gone to rdst. Safia Bibi's house wherefrom noise had been coming.
Continuing his statement he said that he, alongwith Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sharif, had entered that house and had seen Mst. Razia Bibi lying naked in the room and the appellant committing Zina with her. He testified to the precarious condition of Mst. Razia Bibi and stated that she had been taken to Civil Hospital, Gujranwala, where she had been admitted and medically examined. He confirmed the lodging of the first information report, Exh.PA., at Police Station Garjakh.
8. The complainant and his family are not shown to have any previous enmity with the appellant or his family members. The story of purchasing cloth by the complainant on credit from the powerlooms where the appellant was said to be working and the appellant's demand of the outstanding amount of Rs,3,000 which has been given a lie to by the complainant, does not seem to be true and even if it were to be accepted at face value it would not furnish a cause for the complainant to go so far as to put at stake the honour of his virgin daughter and that of his family by involving her in a rape case had the occurrence been not true. Mst. Razia Bibi's medical examination and the result of Chemical Examiner's analysis of her vaginal swabs and Shalwar bearing out presence of semen thereon affirmed beyond doubt commission of Zina-bilJabr with her. The scar of 1 c.m. In size at perineum indicates the brutish manner in which the appellant ravished her. The testimony of Mst. Razia Bibi and Lal Din rings truth and inspires confidence. It has rightly been believed by the learned trial Court to determine the guilt of the appellant.
Consequently his conviction of the commission of offence of Zina-bil-Jabr punishable under section 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, recorded by the learned trial Court is affirmed.
9. We feel that the sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment given to the appellant by the learned trial Court, in view of the circumstances of the case, is not adequate. The appellant acted like a fiend and committed the abominable act of Zina-bil-Jabr with a girl of tender age causing her immeasurable physical pain and agony and indelible scar on her honour and reputation for all time to come.l Instead of giving her protection like a good neighbour he maltreated her in a merciless manner which cannot be describe in words. He does not deserve sympathy in matter of punishment. His is the case for handing out the maximum term of imprisonment ordained by law.
Accordingly we enhance his sentence from ten years' rigorous imprisonment to twenty-five years' rigorous imprisonment. The sentence of thirty stripes of whipping is left intact. With the aforesaid enhancement of sentence of imprisonment the appeal stands dismissed.
Sentence enhanced.