' M. JAVED BUTTUR, J.--- The appellants, Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad. Mushtaq, were tried by the Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No,I, Lahore, in case F.I.R. No,134 of 1999, dated 8-3-1999 under section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII, 1979 registered at Police Station Saddar Raiwind, District Kasur, for having allegedly committed Zina-bil-Jabr with the complainant.
Mst. Rukhsana Bibi. The learned trial Court vide its judgment, dated 5-11-1999 convicted the appellants under section 10(4), of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII, 1979 and sentenced them to death. The appellants have challenged the legality and correctness of their convictions and sentences through present Criminal Appeal No,1150 of 1999. The learned trial Court has forwarded the Murder Reference No,499/T of 1999 for confirmation of the death sentences. Both these matters are being disposed of through this judgment.
2. The relevant facts as narrated by the complainant Mst. Rukhsana Bibi in her complaint (Exh.P.D.) are that on 6-3-1999 at 9-00 a.m. She set for the house of her brother Mukhtar Ahmad situated in Mouza Boharr from Village Nol where she had gone to visit her relative Allah Ditta, in the company of Muhammad Iqbal appellant, resident of Mouza Nol and Mushtaq appellant resident of Rawal who stated that they were also going to village Boharr and they would take her there. The complainant alleged that on the way both the appellants forcibly took her to the sugarcane fields and when she raised noise she was threatened with life and thereafter both the appellants committed Zina-bil-Jabr with her and further threatened that if she informed the police of the occurrence, she will be killed and left her near village Boharr. The complainant further narrated that on reaching her house she narrated the occurrence to her brother Mukhtar Ahmad. The complaint was lodged on 8-3-1999 at 5-20 p.m.
3. The Investigating Officer after completing his investigation submitted the challan report under section 173, Cr.P.C. The learned trial Court charged the appellant under section 10(4) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII, 1979 on 25-5-1999 to which the appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also seen the record.
5. The complainant/the victim (P.W.7) has not supported the prosecution case. In the cross- examination she admitted that she had given the statement in Court as tutored to her by one Ramzan who had, threatened her that if she did not give the statement according to the tutored statement, her children will be killed and due to this threat she gave statement according to the wishes of said Ramzan. She further admitted that the accused present in Court had not committed intercourse with her and that these persons were innocent. There is no other eyewitnesses of the occurrence. This makes the whole of the prosecution case as doubtful. P.W.6 Muhammad Jamil, S.- I. Who investigated the case admitted in the cross-examination that according to his investigation the occurrence was doubtful. Dr. Parveen Akhtar (P.W.1) who examined the complainant, stated that there were no marks of any type of injury on the body of the complainant and there was no marks of violence on her private parts. The complainant is a married female and, therefore, report of the Chemical Examiner that the vaginal swabs,were stained with semen are not a proof of Zina- bil-Jabr with her by the appellants. She may have had the sexual intercourse with her husband before her medical examination. The medical examination report in the absence of any other evidence does not establish the offence. The abovementioned shows that it isa case of no evidence and the trial Court acted illegally in convicting the appellants.
6. In view of the abovementioned, the appeal is accepted, convictions and sentences as recorded by the trial Court against the appellants are set aside and the appellants are acquitted of the charge and are directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case. The death sentences is accordingly not confirmed and Murder Reference is answered in negative.