' MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.---This petition for leave to appeal arises from the facts that Ashiq Hussain alias Muhammad Ashiq was tried under section 377, P.P.C. For committing sodomy with Naveed Ahmad aged. Seven/eight years, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhelum, who, on conclusion of the trial, vide judgment dated 31-5-1994, convicted him under section 377, P.P.C. And sentenced him to five years' R.I., and a fine of Rs,10,000 or six months' S.I. In case of default. On appeal filed by the petitioner, the Federal Shariat Court, vide its judgment dated 16-11-1994, while maintaining the sentence of fine awarded by the trial Court reduced the sentence of five years into three years' R.I. Fine, if realized, was ordered to be paid to the victim through his father as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was allowed by both the Courts.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been heard. The conviction of the petitioner rests on the statement of Naveed Ahmad (P.W.9/victim), Tanveer Ahmad (P.W.6) and Suleman Hussain (P.W.7) to whom the victim narrated the occurrence after the occurrence, statement of Dr. Khakhan Qadar (P.W.5) and the report of the Chemical Examiner Exh.PH. Naveed Ahmad has fully supported the charge of sodomy against the petitioner. Tanveer Ahmad and Suleman Hussain P.Ws. Have stated that immediately after the occurrence, the victim had narrated the occurrence to them. The victim was medically examined on 11-11-1993. According to the Medico-Legal Report sodomy had been committed on Naveed Ahmad. Chemical Examiner's report with regard to the swabs is positive.
3. The Courts below have believed the evidence of Naveed Ahmad. From the medical evidence and report of the Chemical Examiner there remains no doubt that sodomy was committed upon him.
He states that the petitioner had committed sodomy with him. He had no motive to involve the petitioner falsely. No foundation for the substitution of the petitioner in place of real culprit has been laid down. We do not see any infirmity in the evidence or in the impugned judgment justifying interference with the well-reasoned judgments of the two Courts below.
4. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused, and the petition is dismissed. The petitioner is on bail. The trial Court will get the petitioner arrested. On his arrest he will be sent to jail to serve the remaining sentence.