' MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, J.---This petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 calls in "question the validity of the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 6-6-2001, whereby Criminal Appeal No,371 of 1999 of the respondents, was partly accepted. The conviction of Nadeem alias Billa respondent No,1 was altered from section 302(b), P.P.C. To section 302(c), P.P.C. And his sentence of life imprisonment was modified to 10 years' R.I.
However, the payment of Rs,50,000 as compensation was maintained.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Bashir Ahmad and his sons Nadeem alias Billa and Khalid Bashir, the respondents were tried by Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore under sections 302/34/337-F- 1/337-L-1/337-A-II P.P.C. For the murder of Zahid Manzoor son of Manzoor Hussain, the complainant and causing injuries to Manzoor Hussain P.W. Charge was accordingly framed against them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case produced 17 witnesses. After close of the prosecution evidence, the respondents recorded their statements under section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein they stated that the complainant, his son Zahid Manzoor the deceased and his nephew, Shahzad armed with Sotas came to their house, called out Bashir Ahmad, started beating him and also injured his wife, due to which Nadeem alias Billa under grave and sudden provocation exercising the right of self-defence inflicted a blow with Chhuri on the deceased and Khalid Bashir co-accused also in exercise of the right of self-defence snatched Danda from Shahzad, nephew of the complainant and gave a blow with it to the complainant. The learned trial Judge, on conclusion of the trial, convicted Nadeem alias Billa under sections 302(b), P.P.C. And keeping in view mitigating circumstances which forced him to commit the murder of Zahid Manzoor, sentenced him to life imprisonment as. Ta'zir and to pay compensation of Rs,50,000 under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Or in default thereof to undergo two years' S.I. Vide his judgment dated 2-4-1999. His co-accused Bashir Ahmad and Khalid Bashir were, however, acquitted under section 302, P.P.C. But were convicted under section 337, P.P.C. For causing injuries to Manzoor Hussain P.W.
And sentenced them to 6 months' R.I. Plus fine of Rs,2,000 each or in default to undergo one month S.I. Each. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to all the accused. The respondents challenged their conviction and sentence before the Lahore High Court, Lahore through Criminal Appeal No,371 of 1999 and a learned Judge in Chambers of the said High Court vide his judgment dated 6-6-2001 set aside the conviction of Nadeem alias Billa under section 302(b) P.P.C. And instead convicted him under section 302(c) P.P.C. And sentenced him to 10 years' R.I. Sentence of compensation was, however, maintained. Vide the same judgment, the conviction and sentences of Bashir Ahmad and Khalid Bashir, the respondents were maintained.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitiond and have gone through the record of the case. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner had filed a revision petition against acquittal of respondents No,2 and 3 under section 302(b), P.P.C. But the said revision petition was found to be incompetent under section 439(5), Cr.P.C. As remedy of appeal against acquittal under section 417 (2-A), Cr.P.C. Was available, thus, revision petition was not pressed and the same was dismissed accordingly vide order dated 23-10-2000 which was not assailed before this Court and thus it attained finality qua respondents Nos.2 and 3 with regard to their acquittal under section 302(b), P.P.C.
4. It is evident from the record that the complainant alongwith his son had gone to the house of the respondents to lodge a protest for abusing his family members where a free fight took place between the parties wherein the complainant and his son, on the one side were injured whereas accused Bashir Ahmad and his wife were injured on the other side. The defence plea is that Manzoor Hussain alongwith his son Zahid Manzoor and nephew Shahzad armed with Sotas came to the house of Bashir Ahmad and called him out. When he came out, he was beaten by the complainant party and on his noise his wife and sons also came out. His wife was also beaten by the complainant party, which provoked Nadeem alias Billa who inflicted Chhuri blow to Zahid Manzoor deceased and his brother Khalid Bashir gave a Danda blow to Manzoor Hussain P.W. In self-defence under sudden and grave provocation. The medical evidence also supports the defence version as Dr. Muhammad Afzal P.W.10 found the following injuries on the person of Bashir Ahmad and his wife Sardaran Bibi respectively:- Bashir Ahmad "(1). A lacerated wound 2 x .5 c.m.m. Into bone deep on left parietal region of head with swelling 4 x 3 c.m.m.
(2). Contused swelling 8 x 6 c.m.m. On left frontal region of head extending to forehead.
(3). Abraded swelling 4 x 3 c.m.m. On mid frontal region of head.
(4). Contused swelling 6 x 4 c.m.m. On mid top of head.
(5). Multiple contusion in an area 15 x 10 c.m.m. On top and back of left shoulder.
(6). Contusion 14 x 1 c.m.m. On back upper left chest.
(7). Contusion 4 x 2 c.m.m. On back mid left chest.
(8). Multiple contusion in an area 12 x 8 c.m.m. On right calvicular region.
(9). Multiple contusion in an area 13 x 9 c.m.m. On top and back of right shoulder.
(10). Abraded swelling 9 x 5 c.m.m. On back upper right forearm.
(11). Contusion 4 x 3 c.m.m. On back of left elbow." Sardaran Bibi ' "She gave history of broken first upper right premolar. No corresponding injury on gums or lips. She was referred to Dental Surgeon. Injury was kept under observation for Dental Surgeon Report. Injury was by blunt weapon and duration was within four hours Exh.P.K. Is the correct carbon copy of Sardaran Bibi injured MLR No,GR-42-4327-AF/97 dated 15-6-1997 which is written and signed by me."
5. Undoubtedly, the prosecution totally suppressed the injuries caused to Bashir Ahmad, respondent No,2 and his wife, thus, they did not disclose the whole story truly. In a criminal case, the accused are not required to prove the defence plea beyond reasonable doubt but they have merely to show the version put up by them was reasonably possible. The learned High Court, after scrutinizing both the versions i.e, of the prosecution and the defence in juxtaposition, concluded that respondent No,1 acted in self-defence and held that the offence was not premeditated or preplanned and fell under section 302(c), P.P.C. Thus altered his conviction and sentence to the said section. We find no legal infirmity in the same. This petition is, therefore, dismissed and .