' The appellants have been convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Jacobabad for offences under sections 325 read with 149, 323 read with 149 and 147, P. P. C. And they have been sentenced to R. I.
For two years, six months and they have been sentenced to R. I. For two years, six months and six months respectively on each count the sentences to run concurrently.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 26-3-1969 at about sunrise time complainant Pirjan hari of one Bijar Khan was going from his village to Kandkot town for purchase of bullocks. One Bahadur and his son Ali Hasan had also gone with him. When they reached the bridge over Cltakar Khan watercourse the four appellants and absconding accuse& Gut Hasan challenged Pirjan and attacked him with lathis. Bahadur and Ali Hassan stood aside due to fear raising cries but none came on the cries. After Pirjan had fallen down the culprits took to their heels.
3. About 10-16 days prior to this incident the cattle of accused Suhrab and Din Muhammad had trespassed into the grain cultivation of Pirjan and Pirjan had therefore given a beating to the graziers and taken the cattle to the pound. Finding all opportunity the accused took their revenge.
4. Pirjan was taken in a tongs to Kandkot Police Station situated at a distance of two miles where Pirjan lodged his F. I. R. On the same day at about 9-00 a.m.
5. It has hardly been disputed that Pirjan sustained blunt weapon injuries. Dr. Mohammad Alam, Asstt. Medical Officer, Kandkot who had examined him found two lacerated wounds on the skull of Pirjan, one lacerated wound with swelling on left hand, one contusion with fracture of ulna bone and three more contusions on the right hand, shoulder and left_ scapula. All the injuries were simple except the injury causing fracture of the ulna bone. Pirjan was treated as indoor patient for about 8 days and discharged on 14-4-1969. He would have been completely cured after three days more.
6. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the witnesses for the prosecution are interested and connected; Pirjan being brother of Bahadur and uncle of Ali Hassan.
Not a single independent witness has come forward to support the case when admittedly they were found passing on the road at the time of the incident. He has then argued that there was some dis-satisfaction between the complainant's party and accused Choohar over matrimonial affairs. Possibly Choohar has been falsely implicated. Lastly the learned counsel has argued that according to the medical evidence the injuries would have completely healed up in about 11 days' time. He has, however, pointed out the opinion of Dr. Modi in his Medical Jurisprudence that a fracture may take from 2 weeks to 5 weeks for the bones to unite and from 6 weeks to 8 weeks for the callus to be absorbed completely. Therefore, possibly there was no fracture in this case and the is very likely because the doctor does not say that the patient was X-rayed nor has the X-ray film been exhibited.
7. With regard to the first point the perusal of the evidence of Pirjan Babadur and Ali Hassan would show that they have deposed in a natural manner and they have neither exaggerated the incident nor given a version which is consistent or contradictory. They stand fully supported by the surrounding facts and circumstances and the medical evidence, the number and nature of blunt weapon injuries on Pirjan. Mere fact of some dis-satisfac non over the promised band of a would- be born baby from the family of Choohar would not be sufficient for Pirjan and the other eye- witnesses to falsely implicate all the five culprits in a case of this nature.
8. There is also no indication that any witnesses actually witnessed this assault on Pirjan but they were not cited in the F. I. R. The F. I. R. Was recorded within about two hours' of the incident and the names of the actual witnesses were duly mentioned in the F. I. R.
9. Lastly with regard to the nature of the offence it might be stated that the medical officer has in his evidence given a definite opinion that there was fracture of the ulna bone. Such a fracture is always palpable and can be detected without any X-ray. The medical officer could not, therefore have made any mistake and no such question has been put to him in his cross-examination. It cannot, therefore be said that the injury in question might have been a simple one.
10. The incident occurred in March, 1969 and the case was committed to Court of Sessions on 30-8- 1972. The appellants were convicted on 13-12-1973. By now about 5 years have passed and the appellant have remained on bail during the pendency of this appeal. They have already suffered the agony of protracted trial for all these years. The injuries caused were not very serious.
Considering all these facts and circumstances I would maintain the conviction of the appellants but reduce their sentence to that already undergone which is about 3 months and 24 days.
11. With the above modification in sentence the appeal is otherwise dismissed. The appellants are on bail and their bail bonds are hereby discharged.