KHIZAR- HAYAT, J.- This State appeal has been filed against the order of Magistrate Section 30, Sialkot, dated 7.7.1986 acquitting the accused/respondents, namely, Riaz alias Ghanji, Hafiz alias Feeja and Muk- tar Ahmad alias Tikka from the charges under Sections 307/324/34 P.P.C.
2. According to the prosecution on 4.2.86, Munir A.' mad, complainant, Muhammad Drees, Rehmat and Allah Rakha were sitting in the Chowk of their village Rayya District Sialkot when Hafiz alias Feeja accused/respondent, armed with rifle, Riaz alias Ghani, armed with gun and Mukhtar Ahmad alias Tikka, empty handed came there raising Lalkara and opened i.e at them because some two days earlier Munir Ahmad had made a report against them to the police as a result whereof the$ were raided. During the occurrence Hafiz fired a shot which did not hit anybody as Munir Ahmad had taken him in his grip who chewed the thumb of his left had with his teeth and got himself released and ran away. The i.e made by Riaz hit Muhammad Drees, Rehmat Ali and Allah Rakha, PWs.
3. According to the doctor, Munir Ahmad suffered scratch on right thumb while Muhammad Drees suffered i.e arm injury measuring 1/4 x 1/4 cm x skin deep on his right arm, while Rehmat Ali and Allah Rakha suffered similar injuries mostly on the ear, and nose region. All the injuries were declared as simple.
4. The accused were arrested and challaned to Court in April, 1986. They were not allowed bail. They pleaded not guilty to the charge and despite half a dozen adjournments were granted to the prosecution for producing evidence, not a single witness was examined. Consequently, the learned trial Court passed the impugned order of acquittal in the following terms: URDU
5. Feeling aggrieved thereby the instant State Appeal has been filed mainly on the following ground:- "That the acquittal of the respondents has resulted into miscarriage of justice, because the evidence brought on the record has proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the respondents".
This ground is absolutely misconceived as no witness had been examined.
6. To my mind, fair opportunity had been allowed to the prosecution for producing the witnesses yet it failed to examine even a single witness despite the fact that the accused were in jail for about 4 months, therefore, the impugned order cannot be said to be unjustified, particularly when as according to the prosecution. Hafiz alias Feeja did not injure anybody by firing from his rifle while Mukhtar Ahmad alias Tikka was empty handed and the i.e allegedly made by Riaz alias Ghani bom his gun caused superficial injury on the non-vital part of the bodies of the aforesaid witnesses. It is also note-worthy that no metallic foreign body was found on the seat of the alleged injuries suffered by Rehmat Ali and Allah Rakha and no bony lesion was seen in X-ray taken of the injuries of Muhammad Drees. The case had thin chances to end in conviction. Besides it, the record shows that the learned counsel for the accused-respondents has stated in an application that the parties have effected a compromise which fact is not controverted by the State counsel. For all these reasons, I find no merit in this appeal and dismiss the same.