' On 7-8-1991 Basham son of Qaim Din (complainant) resident of Dera Murad Jamali submitted a complaint in writing addressed to the Assistant Commissioner, Dera Murad Jamali, that, earlier in the night, accused Saleh Muhammad and others entered his house after getting inmates intoxicated with some intoxicant (tablets etc.) and abducted his daughter Mst. Bana and niece Kamni alias Karima aged about 14 and 13 years respectively. It was prayed that the accused as well as the abducted girls may be arrested and justice be done. The case was registered by the Levies.
Initially, Saleh Muhammad, appellant Dost Muhammad and appellant Ahmad Din were arrested.
Accused Qadir Bakhsh absconded. Later on Khaliqdad, Riaz and Ejaz were also made accused and arrested on the ground that they were also involved in the abduction. After completion of investigation, challan was submitted. During the trial, prosecution examined 8 witnesses. Haji Abdul Khaliq was examined as a Court-witness. The six accused who faced_ trial (apart from absconder Qadir Bakhsh Soomro) gave their statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. By the impugned judgment dated 19-4-1994, the two appellants, namely, Dost Muhammad and Ahmad Din both sons of Saleh Muhammad Soomro, have been convicted under section 363, P.P.C. And sentenced to seven years R.I. Each and fined Rs,50,000 each and in default to further undergo R.I. For one year each. The other four accused who faced trial, namely, Saleh Muhammad son of Qadir Bakhsh Soomro, Ejaz son of Sajan Khalid Dad son of Imam Bakhsh Jat and Riaz Hussain son of Noor Muhammad were acquitted. Being aggrieved, the two convicts, Dost Muhammad and Ahmad Din, have filed the present appeal. I have heard Mr. Aziz Ullah Memon, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Yakub Khan Eusufzai, learned Advocate-General, Balochistan, for the State. With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the record.
2. In this case, there is no eye-witness or direct evidence of abduction of the two girls. From the F.I.R.
And also the evidence of P.W.1 complainant Basham, it is apparent that the two girls had left or had been abducted without being seen by any one. The two abductees have not appeared during the trial. According to the complainant, the two girls were in custody of the accused but, in spite of the houses of the accused having been searched, the two girls have not been found. It is also apparent from the evidence that, even according to the prosecution, the two girls had not been abducted but had left their house voluntarily. In the complaint sent by the complainant to the Assistant Commissioner, prayer had been made for the arrest of the accused as well as of the two girls. Then Haji Abdul Khaliq son of Haji Qaiser Khan, who had been examined as a Court-witness, stated in his evidence that the complainant and prosecution witness Mouria had come to his house and had informed him that the two girls had run away and that they should be recovered. He further stated that the complainant and Mouria had suspicion that Saleh Muhammad was involved in the abduction and accordingly Court-witness -Haji Abdul Khaliq had called Saleh Muhammad to his house and he informed the witness that the girls were not with him but he will make efforts for the recovery of the girls.
3. The only evidence brought on record by the prosecution is that of the trackers, P.W.3 Sukhara and others, According to P.W.3 Sukhara, his house is near the house of complainant and that on the day of the incident at 5 a.m. The complainant had come to the house of Sukhara and informed about the absence of the two girls and he was asked to see the foot-prints and, according to the witness, the foot-prints of the girls and the two appellants led to the house of Saleh Muhammad. There is no evidence whether the said foot-prints were those of the two girls and the present appellants.
Sukhara has not given any evidence as to how he came to the conclusion that the said foot-prints were of the two girls and the two appellants. Other witnesses who had accompanied Sukhara in the process of tracking the foot-prints have also given evidence. As observed, there is no eye- witness or direct evidence. There has been no recovery. The abductees have not been recovered.
They have not appeared as witnesses in the case. From the evidence it follows, that they left their house voluntarily. The four accused who were tried along with the appellants have been acquitted including Saleh Muhammad. The prosecution has failed to establish their case against the present appellants.
4. As a result, Criminal Appeal No,27-Q of 1994 is allowed, the impugned judgment, dated 19-4-1994 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Usta Muhammad, passed in Sessions Case No,102/93 is set aside and the appellants Dost Muhammad and Ahmad Dirt both sons of Saleh Muhammad Soomro are acquitted of the charge. The two appellants are on bail from this Court. Their bail bonds are discharged.