' This appeal arises from the judgment of Judicial Magistrate Section 30, Jauharabad who vide his judgment, dated 16-3-1988 convicted and sentenced the appellants Muhammad Ramzan son of Nawaz aged 20 years, Khan Zaman son of Muhammad Zaman aged 18 years and Ghulam Mustafa son of Fateh Muhammad aged 17 years, under section 307/34, P.P.C. To undergo 5 years' R.I. Each with a fine of Rs,5,000 each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 months' R.I. Each. Out of the fine, if recovered, Rs,10,000 be given to Atta Muhammad injured as compensation. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was given to Muhammad Ramzan and Khan Zaman.
2. P.W.1 Yar Muhammad complainant on 24-9-1987 at 11-40 p.m. Made statement Exh.PA. Before P.W.5 Azhar Abbas, A.S.1. To the effect that he was cultivating the land of Syed Rafaqat Hussain Shah in Chak No, 45/MB as tenant and was also living on the same land after constructing "Dora".
On the day of occurrence i,e. 24-9-1987 at about 3-30 p.m. The complainant's real brother Atta Muhammad was coming with cattles from the said fields to the "Dera". Suddenly Muhammad Ramzan, Khan Zaman and Ghulam Mustafa, appellants, armed with "Dangs" reached there and raised "Lalkara" that they would not spare him that day and the first "Dang" blow was given by Muhammad Ramzan on the head of Atta Muhammad P.W.2, Thereafter Khan Zaman and Ghulam Mustafa inflicted Dang blows on the head of Atta Muhammad who fell down and on fallen Atta Muhammad all the three appellants inflicted Dang blows. Muhammad Ramzan inflicted "Dang" blow on the left hand, Khan Zaman gave "Dang". Blow on the left buttock, Ghulam Mustafa inflicted Dang blow on the back and front side of chest of Atta Muhammad, P.W.2. Sultan Muhammad son of Ghulam Muhammad P.W.3 was cutting fodder in the nearby field and on hue and cry he reached the spot and witnessed the occurrence. The accused succeeded in escaping from the scene. The motive behind is that Mst. Fateh Khatoon was abducted by Mutee Utah, real brother of the appellants and was restored due to intervention of "Brathery" and was married later on with the brother of the complainant. The appellants had grievance and after making mutual consultation of murderous assault injured Atta Muhammad who was taken in injured condition to the hospital.
Hence this case.
3. The prosecution examined 6 P.Ws. In this case, P.W.1, the complainant Yar Muhammad narrated the facts made in statement Exh.P.A. P.W.2 Atta Muhammad is the injured P.W. Who corroborated the statement made by P.W.1. P.W.3 Muhammad Sultan stated that he was cutting fodder in nearby field. Meanwhile the appellants armed with "Dangs" reached there and attacked P.W.2 Atta Muhammad and inflicted injuries with "Dangs" who fell down and when the P.W.3 reached the appellants ran away. P.W.4 Nazar Muhammad A.S.I. On 24-9-1987 while working as Moharrir on receiving the statement Exh.PA., recorded F.I.R., Exh.PA./1. P.W.5 Azhar Abbas is the Investigating Officer who recorded the statement of the complainant Exh.PA. On 24-9-1987 and had investigated the case and after completion of the investigation submitted the challan in Court. P.W.6, Dr. Haji Ahmad, Medical Officer, D.H.Q. Hospital, Jauharabad had medically examined the injured P.W.2 Atta Muhammad and found 8 injuries on his person caused with blunt weapon. Injuries Nos. 1 to 3, 4 and 5 were kept under observation, while the remaining were declared simple. He issued M.L.R., Exh.P.E.
After examination injury No,1 was declared grievous and others simple. During cross-examination P.W.6 stated that the injured was fit to make statement. Muhammad Ramzan, Khan Zaman and Ghulam Mustafa appellants, had produced "Lathis" P.1, P.2, P.3 respectively which were taken into possession vide memos. P.B., P.C. And P.D. By the "Thanedar" who attested the said recoveries.
Those are of no significance and have no corroborative value. The appellants when examined unde section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the prosecution evidence against them and recoveries of P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3. D.W.1 Khalid Mahmood and D.W.2 Muhammad Bashir stated that at the time of occurrence the appellants and the complainant party had exchanged abuses with each other.
D.W. 2 corroborated D.W.1 and had made statement before the Police in defence of the appellants.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that although injury No,1 was caused on the left forearm of the injured P.W. Yet was not on vital part of the body and though declared grievous but was not dangerous to life.
5. Injury No,1 caused with blunt weapon was declared grievous but not dangerous to life. In the circumstances I alter their sentence from section 307/34, P.P.C. To 325/34, P.P.C. I am of the view that prosecution has succeeded to establish its case against the appellants. The learned counsel for the appellants has prayed for leniency in the matter of sentence. The occurrence took place in the year 1987 and the appellants remained in jail as undertrial prisoners and as convicts till their sentence was suspended by this Court for about one and a half yeaRs, In the circumstances I feel that the agony of trial and imprisonment suffered by them is sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
The fine of Rs,5,000 each is reduced to Rs,1,500 each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month R.I. Each. Out of the fine if realised Rs,3,000 shall be paid to Atta Muhammad P.W., as compensation. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds are discharged. The appellants shall deposit the fine within two weeks in the trial Court. .