1. ' The facts out of which the present proceedings arise are briefly stated hereunder.
2. Muhammad Ilyas son of Hurmat Khan, Nazir Ahmad son of Hassan Khan and Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din filed a Constitutional petition in this Court being Writ Petition No,3648 of 2001 for quashment of F.I.R. No,24 under sections 420/468 and 471, P.P.C. Registered with Police. Station North Cantt., Lahore on 18-1-2001. The F.I.R. Was got registered by Muhammad Sadiq alleging therein that his real sister Mst. Khurshid Bibi had died in Karachi in the year 1990 and on 4-1-996, Muhammad llyas son of Hurmat Khan in place of his late sister produced another woman, namely, Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Din Muhammad wife of Muhammad Aril and fraudulently got the share of the land of his late sister measuring 10 Kanals and 11 Marlas in connivance with other accused transferred in his favour. The other accused named in the F.I.R. Were Nazir Ahmad son of Hassan Khan, Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din and Fazal Karim son of Sahib Din who attested the sale-deed as marginal witnesses.
3. The quashment of the F.I.R. Was sought on the grounds that Mst. Khurshid Bibi had herself got registered the sale-deed in favour of the writ petitioners, therefore, Muhammad Sadiq has falsely alleged in the F.I.R. That she had died whereas she is still alive and got registered case F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 (Exh.P.E.) against her brother Muhammad Sadiq and others and the aforesaid Muhammad Sadiq had no authority to get a case registered against the writ petitioners and others.
4. This petition came up for hearing before this Court on 9-3-2001 when the learned counsel for the writ petitioners was directed to produce Mst. Khurshid Bibi in the Court whereas the S.H.O. Police Station North Cantt. Was also directed to produce record of the case and to produce Muhammad Sadiq, complainant of the impugned F.I.R. The next date of hearing was 12-3-2001 on which date Muhammad Sadiq. Complainant appeared and submitted that his real sister Mst. Khurshid Bibi had already died in the year 1996 while on the other hand Ilyas, writ petitioner stated that she was still alive. On the said date, learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that Khurshid Bibi will appear if a notice is issued to her. Both Muhammad Sadiq and Ilyas were told that if the statements made by them are found to be false then they would have to face the consequences.
2. The case was then taken up on 14-3-2001 when Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Din Muhammad was produced and her statement was recorded on oath. She in her statement deposed that she was not the real sister of Muhammad Sadiq because she was daughter of Din Muhammad while Sadiq was son of Sardar Ali and she had got no relation with Muhammad Sadiq. She further deposed that the case registered with Police Station Chunian, District Kasur vide F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 was never lodged by her. She also produced her Nikahnama (mark "A") showing her father and husband name. Also stated that writ petitioners (accused) took her in a car, got her thumb-impression on different papers and ultimately gave Rs,2,000 to her husband. On the said date, that is 14-3-2001 the statement of Muhammad Sadiq was also recorded. After their statements were recorded, learned Additional Advocate-General submitted that fraud had been committed not only upon Muhammad Sadiq and Khurshid Bibi but also upon this Court by making a false writ petition alongwith false affidavit. After going through the above-referred statements, this Court was fully satisfied that a misstatement had been made by the writ petitioners (accused). The writ petition was thus, dismissed with cost and show-cause notices were issued against the writ petitioners (accused) to explain their position that why they should not be convicted for committing perjury.
3. ' On 29-3-2001, charge under section 193, P.P.C. Was framed against all the accused that all of them in the course of judicial proceedings of Writ Petition No,3648 of 2001 before this Court stated in their petition alongwith an affidavit by saying that they had purchased the land measuring 10 Kanals and 11 Marlas from one Khurshid Bibi sister of Muhammad Sadiq son of Sardar Muhammad who had herself got registered the said sale-deed in their favour and Muhammad Sadiq got registered a case F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 stating therein that his real sister Khurshid Bibi had died in Karachi in 1990 and the accused in place of his sister produced another woman Khurshid Bibi daughter of Din Muhammad wife of Muhammad Arif before the Sub-Registrar, Lahore Cantt. And fraudulently got his late sister share, therefore, the said Sadiq had falsely stated in F.I.R. That her sister Khurshid Bibi had died whereas she was still alive and had also got registered case F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 against Sadiq etc. The accused were further charge-sheeted that in pursuance of this Court's order, dated 12-3-2001 Khurshid Bibi appeared before the Court and stated that she was not sister of Muhammad Sadiq being daughter of Din Muhammad while Muhammad Sadiq was son of Sardar Ali and case F.I.R. 650 of 2000 was never lodged by her, hence the accused were falsified by statement of Mst. Khurshid Bibi, thus, they made false statements before this Court which statements they either knew or believed to be false or did not believe to he true.
4. ' The charge was duly read over and explained to all the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Upon this, learned Additional Advocate-General was asked to lead prosecution evidence. The prosecution in order to prove the charge against all the accused examined four witnesses in all. Mst. Khurshid Bibi was examined as P.W. I. She reiterated the earlier statement deposing that she did not know Muhammad Sadiq son of Sardar Muhammad, she was not real sister of Muhammad Sadiq and she had no relationship whatsoever with Muhammad .Sadiq, she did not lodge F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 and in fact Nazir son of Hassan Muhammad got the said case registered in connivance with the police. This witness in her cross-examination stated that she was taken to the Court of Sub-Registrar but she never appeared before the Sub-Registrar and remained sitting on a bench lying outside the Court and the accused persons got her thumb- impression while she was lying on the bench. Muhammad Sadiq appeared as P.W.2. This witness stated on oath that his sister Khurshid Bibi was married to Mushtaq Ahmad and Khurshid Bibi, P.W.
5. Had got no relations whatsoever with him. His sister Khurshid Bibi had died about 11 years ago and he had got registered a case F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 against the accused persons. The present accused persons got a false sale-deed executed in the name of his deceased sister. The witness produced the original Nikahnama of his real sister with Mushtaq, dated 26-2-1979 Exh.P.A. And also produced certified copy of the Nikahnama of Khurshid Bibi P.W. With Muhammad Arif, dated 11-7-1968 Exh.P.B.
6. In cross-examination the witness had stated that he had given an application alongwith Khurshid Bibi P.W. To Sub-Registrar that Khurshid Bibi P.W. Was not his sister and she had not executed the sale-deed in favour of Muhammad Ilyas etc. G.A. Cheema, S.-I./ Additional S.H.O. Police Station North Cantt. Was examined as P.W.3 who had recorded the F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 on the statement of Muhammad Sadiq P.W. He produced attested copy of the said F.I.R. Exh.P.D. This witness was not cross-examined by Ilyas accused. Khalid Pervaiz, Head Constable was examined as P.W.4 who deposed that he was working as Moharrir in Police Station Chunian, District Kasur and produced the attested copy of F.I.R. No,650 of 2000, dated 21-8-2000 Exh.P.E. And result thereof, Exh.P.E./1, that is, cancellation report. This witness also produced an attested copy of affidavit of Mst. Khurshid Bibi P.W., Exh.P.F. In which she had stated that she had not lodged the said F.I.R. This P.W. Was also not cross-examined by Muhammad Ilyas accused. While answering to the remaining accused, this witness admitted that complaint of F.I.R. Exh.P.E. Had thumb-mark and this case was cancelled on 9-1-2001. Then on 30-4-2001 the learned Additional Advocate-General after tendering in evidence certified copy of Writ Petition No,3648 of 2001 Exh.P.G., certified copy of the affidavit of Ilyas, Exh.P.G./1 certified copy of orders dated 9-3-2001, Exh.P.H., certified copy of the deposition of Khurshid Bibi P.W. Exh.P.J., certified copy of statement of Muhammad Sadiq P.W., Exh.P.K. And closed the prosecution evidence.
7. ' During the hearing of these suo motu proceedings, on 20-4-2001, an application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Was moved by the accused for suspension of operation of F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 and the proceedings of a civil suit titled. Mst. Sharifan Bibi v. Muhammad Ilyas etc. Notice was given to the learned Additional Advocate-General for 27-4-2001. As the present proteedings against the accused were initiated under section 193, Cr.P.C. Read with section 476, Cr.P.C. Which had got no relevancy with civil suit or the F.I.R. No,24 of 2001, the application was dismissed.
8. ' Thereafter, accused were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. They met the charge by a denial professing ignorance, however, it was admitted by Ilyas accused that F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 Exh.P.E.
9. Was found to be false and same had been cancelled and Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Din Muhammad had sworn an affidavit Exh.P.F. Stating therein that she had not lodged the said F.I.R.
10. And Muhammad Sadiq got the case registered F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 Exh.P.G. Against him and his co- accused. In reply to question as why this case against him and why P.Ws. Deposed against him, Ilyas accused stated that in fact he had purchased the land after satisfying himself from Khurshid Bibi who had gone to the Patwari in order to get Fard Malkayat. He had verified the said Fard. One Fazal Karim related to Khurshid Bibi had also verified the fact that Mst. Khurshid Bibi was the actual owner of the land in question. Also replied that at the time of purchase market value of the disputed land was less and that as the market value of the said land was increased Muhammad Sadiq in order to get the same back and also to put pressure on him and his co-accused lodged a false case.
11. ' Similarly, all other accused asserted in same manner. The accused persons produced defence evidence. However, refused to step into witness-box to get their statements recorded under section 340(2), 'Cr.P.C. In disproving of the charge levelled against them. The accused in all produced five D.Ws. Khalid Saeed, Record Keeper, Sub-Registrar, Lahore Cantt. Was examined as D.W.1. The witness had brought the record of sale-deed No,221, dated 4-1-1996 Exh.D.A./1-6 which was executed in the presence of the Sub-Registrar. This witness admitted that in the document vendor's name was Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Sardar but according to copy of the identity card of the vendor which was also present on the said record, her name was mentioned as Khurshid Bibi wife of Muhammad Arif. This witness further stated that he was not a Registry Moharrir and was only Record Keeper and this registration had not taken place in his presence. Ghulam Sarwar, Moharrir Police Station, Chunian was produced as D.W.2. He brought daily diary register of Police Station, Chunian dated 17-8-2000 containing Rapt No,I4 Exh.P.D.B. This witness admitted that this Rapt was registered on the statement of Khurshid wife of Muhammad Arif, however, he stated that he cannot say that Khurshid Bibi had herself lodged Exh.D.B. As he did not write this Rapt. D.W.3 was Tariq Mehmood former Sub-Registrar, Lahore Cantt. According to his statement he was working as Sub- Registrar, Lahore, Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Sardar appeared before him for the completion of the sale-deed Exh.D.A., Muhammad Ilyas was purchaser while Fazal Karim had identified Khurshid Bibi and the witnesses of the sale agreement were Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din and Nazir Ahmad son of Hassan Khan, Khurshid Bibi had admitted that she had received the money mentioned in the sale-deed. In cross-examination, the D.W. Admitted that he had seen Exh.D.A./1 original sale-deed wherein the seller name is Khurshid Bibi daughter of Sardar Muhammad while according to copy of I.D. Card of Mst. Khurshid mark "A" her husband's name is mentioned, that is, Muhammad Arif.
12. Further stated that he could not say whether the original Mst. Khurshid Bibi was produced in this case before him. This witness volunteered that purchaser and identifier Fazal Karim were saying that this Mst. Khurshid Bibi which was being produced was the original owner of the land. Fazal Karim son of Sahib Din appeared as D.W.4. According to his deposition, he was property dealer.
13. Sadiq P.W. Was his uncle and Mst. Khurshid Bibi P.W. Was his paternal aunt, this D.W. Went to Halqa Patwari and on his identification the required copy of record of right was delivered, he alongwith Khurshid Bibi thumb-marked the daily diary of the Patwari.
14. ' It is important to note here that this record was never produced during the trial as according to D.W.5, Zia-ur-Rehman present Patwari Halqa his predecessor Maqsood Hassan who issued the alleged copy of record of rights never handed over him record/Roznamcha Waqiati of the said Halqa relating, to the year 1995 and he had got registered case F.I.R. No,98 of 2000 Mark ..."E" against the said Patwari in this regard. D.W.4 further deposed that Ilyas accused paid Rs,2,16,000 in advance and Rs, one lac was paid before the Sub-Registrar. During the cross-examination, this witness denied the suggestion that Mst. Khurshid had died in the year 1990 in Karachi and Khurshid Bibi P.W. Who was identified by him was daughter of Din Muhammad and not of Sardar Muhammad and name of husband of the said Khurshid Bibi was Muhammad Arif, however, when this witness was confronted with Exh.D.A. He admitted that name of the husband of Mst. Khurshid P.W. Was mentioned there, he had seen the I.D. Card of Mst. Khurshid P.W., this witness further admitted that he was not a Lambardar of the village, even not a Councillor or a Chowkidar, he affirmed that he is one of the accused in case No,24 of 2001 recorded on the statement of Muhammad Sadiq P.W. Lastly Zia-ur-Rehman Bhatti was produced as D.W.5 whose deposition has already been discussed in the preceding paragraph. Vide statements dated 22-6-2001, accused closed their defence evidence.
15. ' After closure of the evidence from both the sides, learned counsel were asked to address arguments.
16. ' Learned counsel for the defence after having gone through the entire evidence brought on record and other material available on the file mainly contends that in fact the accused were bona tide purchasers of the disputed property and have not committed any fraud and if any fraud had been committed, it was Mst. Khurshid Bibi who at the behest of Muhammad Sadiq P.W. Made a false statement against the accused persons. Further submits that statement of Mst. Khurshid Bibi cannot be relied having no corroboration from any independent source. Adds that accused purchased the land after verification of the Fard Malkayat of Mst. Khurshid Bibi, the actual owner of the land and as the market value of the land has been increased, so Sadiq in order to get the same land back lodged a false case against the accused. Further adds that regarding the alleged fraud case F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 lodged by Muhammad Sadiq, P.W. Is already pending and it would amount to double jeopardy if the accused are sentenced in the present proceedings. Lastly submits that the prosecution has not been able to prove guilt against the accused and they may be acquired.
17. ' Conversely, learned Additional Advocate-General assisted by Mr. Khalid Naveed Dar, Advocate who was asked by the Court to be of assistance in these proceedings emphasizes that prosecution has been successful in establishing the guilt against the accused persons who have admittedly purge red themselves and deserve no leniency whatsoever.
18. ' I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have carefully gone through the record.
19. Mst. Khurshid Bibi ( P.W. 1 ) in her examination-in-chief clearly stated that the name of her father was Din Muhammad. According to learned counsel for the defence, she was an interested witness and her testimony cannot be believed. I am unable to pursuade myself because the evidence of P.W.1 is substantial and is corroborated by P.W.2 Muhammad Sadiq. Both these P.Ws., that is P. W.1 and P.W.2 are consistent. Mst. Khurshid Bibi (P.W.1) though was the most important witness but she was not cross-examined by Ilyas accused despite Opportunity having been given. Therefore, the statement of Khurshid Bibi shall be considered to have been accepted by llyas accused. The remaining two accused while cross-examining Mst. Khurshid Bibi (P.W.1) never suggested that she was daughter of Sardar Muhammad rather they did not dispute that she was daughter of Muhammad Din and wife of Muhammad Arif. Similarly, it was no where suggested to Mst. Khurshid Bibi (P.W.1) that Sadiq P.W. Was real brother of Mst. Khurshid (P.W.1). She in clear terms stated that she did not know Sadiq son of Sardar and neither she visited the Patwari Halqa Lidhar for getting the Fard Malkayat nor got registered F.I.R. No,650 of 2000. This witness (P.W.1) denied the suggestion that she received Rs,1,60,000 from the accused as earnest money and Rs,1,00,000 before the Sub- Registrar. While cross-examining Muhammad Sadiq P.W.2 the accused conceded that Khurshid sister of Sadiq P.W. Was married with Mushtaq and the accused no where suggested to this witness that Khurshid Bibi wife of Arif was her real sister. The accused persons also did not dispute the Exhs.P.A. And P.B., two Nikahnamas of Khurshid daughter of Sardar and Khurshid daughter of Din Muhammad respectively. The accused also did not controvert the statement of P.W.2 to the effect that his real sister Khurshid Bibi died in the year 1990. There is nothing against these P.Ws. That they are telling lie or they are falsely implicating the accused persons. Both these P.Ws. Had no animus against the accused persons. From the perusal of their statements it is established that though it was in the knowledge of the accused that case F.I.R. No,650 of 2000 allegedly lodged by Khurshid Bibi had been cancelled, they deliberately filed Writ Petition No,3648 of 2001 and sworn a false affidavit in support of the writ petition by stating that Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter of Sardar was still alive.
20. ' Fazal Karim (D.W.2) being accused of case F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 has made false statements to save his skin, his testimony is of not credence. This witness though claims that Sadiq was his uncle and Khurshid P.W. Was his paternal aunt but he did not know the name of her husband. This witness again admitted that Mst. Khurshid was produced before the Sub-Registrar she was got identified through identity card and confirmed that he had seen the card of Khurshid wife of Arif. D.W.3 is Sub-Registrar. He categorically stated that he cannot say whether original Khurshid Bibi was produeed before him. The remaining D.Ws. Namely D.W.I, D.W.2 and D.W.5, their evidence is irrelevant for the purpose of present proceedings. I, therefore, discard the defence evidence.
21. ' The contention of learned counsel for the defence that continuation of the proceedings underhand amounts to double jeopardy because a criminal case regarding the alleged fraud already stands registered. The argument of learned counsel for the defence is misconceived. These proceedings are not the subject-matter of F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 rather relate to an offence committed by the writ petitioners during the pendency of proceedings before this Court.
22. ' From the above analysis of the evidence produced by the prosecution and the D.Ws. I am fully convinced that the prosecution has been able to successfully prove the charge against the three accused under section 193, P.P.C. Beyond any shadow of doubt. Life/reputation of an innocent citizen or jeopardize his liberty by falsely involving him in a criminal case, does not deserve any leniency and ought never, to be let off lightly. It was held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Karim Khatoon v. The State PLD 1984 SC 44 wherein it was held as under:-- "Perjury is one of the most heinous, social and moral offence. It is not only an offence punishable under the law but is also against the Injunction of Holy Qur'an. It is an evil which tends to disrupt the very basis of the social order and makes a mockery of the judicial system, be it Islamic or otherwise. Any person who deliberately tells a lie during the solemn proceedings of a Court of law, knowing fully well that he is thereby likely to ruin the life or reputation of an innocent person or put into jeopardy his liberty by falsely involving him in a criminal case or cause damage to his property, does not deserve any leniency and ought never be let off lightly."
23. 'Resultantly, all the three accused namely Muhammad Ilyas, Nazir Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din (petitioners in Writ Petition No,3648 of 2001) are sentenced to undergo three (3) years' R.I.
24. Each under section 193 of Pakistan Penal Code with a fine of Rs,5,000 each and in default all the three convicts shall undergo further R.I. For two months.
25. ' Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that a person who deliberately tells. a lie during the solemn proceedings of a Court of law, knowing fully well that he is thereby likely to ruin the When the case was called, Muhammad Ilyas and Nazir Ahmad were present but Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din was not present. The case was fixed for today on the last date of hearing in the presence of all the accused and their learned counsel. Muhammad Nazir has intentionally not appeared. Let non-bailable warrant of his arrest be issued. Deputy Registrar (J.) will convey the order of this Court with specific direction to S.P. Cantt. To execute the non-bailable warrant against Nazir Ahmad son of Nizam Din. And send him to judicial lock-up to serve out his sentence.
26. Muhamniad Ilyas and Nazir Ahmad son of Hassan Khan have been taken into custody.
27. Accused convicted.