' Ashfaq Hussain son of Sabir Hussain was tried for the charge under section 324, P.P.C. By Magistrate 1st Class, Faisalabad, who vide judgment, dated 30-4-1988 convicted and sentenced him to one year's R.I. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad in appeal maintained his conviction under section 324, P.P.C. But reduced his sentence from one year's R.I. To eight months'
R.I.
2. The case in brief isl that on 26-1-1985 at about 11-00 a.m. Nasir Mahmood, injured P.W. Went to the shop of Nasir Mahmood P.W. To get his bicycle repaired and in the meanwhile, the petitioner armed with knife appeared there and gave stab blow on the left side of buttock of the injured P.W. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Tufail and Nasir Mahmood P.W.
3. The motive as stated was that 10/12 days before the occurrence a quarrel took place between the petitioner and the injured P.W. And the former in order to take revenge of that incident attacked on the injured. The case was registered against the petitioner on the statement of Ghulam Nabi P.W. On 27-1-1985. The injured was removed to the hospital where he was medically examined by Dr. A.A. Khalid who found the following injury on his person: "A stab wound 2-1/2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Deep on right buttock vertical."
4. The prosecution apart from Muhammad Tufail P.W.3, Nasir Mahmood, injured P.W.4 and Nasir Mahmood as eye-witnesses produced five other witnesses at the trial. The accused pleaded innocence and false implication stating that 10/12 days earlier he had a quarrel with the injured and matter went to the police and as a result thereof the present case against him. He also produced defence evidence.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the presence of Muhammad Tufail P.W. Being a proclaimed offender at the spot is not possible but he has not been able to substantiate his arguments through any documentary evidence on the record. The witness appeared in the Court as a result of process issued, he neither avoided from appearing before the Court nor there was any report made in this behalf. The arguments of the learned counsel are misconceived and without any basis. The occurrence took place at the shop of Nasir Mahmood P.W. Who is a most natural witness of the occurrence. The ocular account is consistent with no contradiction and seeks corroboration from medical and recovery evidence. The earlier incident as pleaded in defence, if any between the petitioner and the injured was not of a serious nature to suggest the injury to be self-inflicted.
6. For the foregoing reasons, I see no ground for interference and this revision fails.
7. However, the occurrence took place over a petty matter without any serious enmity between the parties. The petitioner caused a solitary simple injury and faced agony of trial for about a period of five years. He remained in jail for about a month which period, in the circumstances of the case is sufficient sentence to meet the ends of justice. The sentence of the petitioner is, therefore, reduced to the period already undergone by him. With this modification this revision petition is dismissed.
Sentence reduced.