This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 1519 of 2002 filed by Samuel Masih, appellant, who was convicted and sentenced by learned Judge Special Court No.1, Gujranwala vide his judgment dated 10-8-2002 to undergo five years' R.I. With the further direction to pay Rs.5,000 as fine for committing murderous assault upon Liaqat Ali, A.S.-I. And five years' R.I. With the further direction to par Rs.5,000 as fine for committing murderous assault upon Israr Ahmad Constable, in default three months' S.I. Under section 7(b) of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 Under section 353 P.P.C. Two years' R.I. And three months' R.I. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently with the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Occurrence in this case had taken place on 7-5-2002 at 9-00 a.m. Within the jurisdiction of Police Station, City Kamoke, District Gujranwala at a distance of two furlongs while the matter was reported to the police on the same day at 9/10 a.m. By Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. And the formal F.I.R.
Exh.PA was recorded by Liaqat Ali, S.-I.
3. Facts of the prosecution case as disclosed by Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. In a complaint Exh.PA are that he was posted as Incharge of Chowki Gunna Oor, where son of Naimat Masih came and informed him that his father had made a petition against Samuel Masih regarding abduction for ransom which is pending and further informed him that Samuel Masih has sent a telephonic message from a P.C.O. At Kamoke City and has demanded the remaining amount of ransom and had threatened in case the remaining amount is not paid. The complainant in the company of Israr Ahmad, Constable reached Kamoke and found Samuel Masih on the P.C.O. Who after looking at the complainant picked the knife from his Shalwar and attacked on the complainant who was luckily saved. Israr Ahmad, Constable also tried to apprehend him but the accused also attacked on him who was also saved. The complainant in his self-defence fired at Samuel Masih which hit a passerby Nazar Hussain. The persons present there threw pieces of brick and Samuel. Masih was injured. After investigation, the accused was challaned to face the trial.
4. At the trial, prosecution in order to prove its case produced four witnesses in all, thereafter, learned P.P. Closed the prosecution evidence then the statement of the appellant was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. In which he pleaded innocence and claimed false implication.
5. In support of this petition, learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, that none of the member of the raiding party received a single scratch on his body, that in fact, it was the police, who had tortured the appellant, that Nazar Hussain passerby was seriously injured by Liaqat Ali Shah, A. S.-I. And in this regard a case F. I. R. No. 113, dated 7-5-2002 was also registered against Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. On the statement son of Nazar Hussain, namely Talib Hussain, that recovery of knife has been planted on the appellant, that appellant was never involved in any case prior to the present occurrence, that all the witnesses are Police officials, that no public witness was produced, that no case is made out against the appellant and he is entitled to acquittal.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that appellant is named in the F.I.R., that he tried to give injuries with knife on the person of Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. And Israr Ahmad, Constable but it was their good luck that they did not receive any injury from the hands of the present appellant, that Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. Had acted in right of self-defence but unfortunately, Nazar Hussain was injured. He supports the judgment of the learned trial Court.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at a great length and have also gone through the record with their able assistance. It is a case which seems to be an example of highhandedness of the police. As far as, appellant is concerned, it was stated in the F.I.R. That he was armed with knife and he tried to give injuries with knife on the person of Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. And Israr Ahmad, Constable but none of them received a single scratch on his body. The narration of the F.I.R. Which was lodged by Liaqat Ali, S.-I. States that passerby gave injuries to the appellant with brick bat but none of them has been produced by the prosecution. In fact it was the appellant who received injuries in this case. Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. Fired a shot which hit one Nazar Hussain (passerby) and in this regard case RI.R. No.113, dated 7-5-2002 was registered in Police Station, City Kamoke against Liaqat Ali Shah, A.S.-I. On the statement of Talib Hussain son of Nazar Hussain injured under sections 324, 148 and 149, P.P.C. The said Nazar Hussain was the most natural witness in this case but he was never produced by the prosecution. No public witness to support the prosecution has been produced by the prosecution. As far as recovery of knife is concerned, both the witnesses were police officials, one was produced and other was given up by the prosecution and no public witness was produced by the prosecution in this regard. Appellant was also injured, he was medically examined on the same day by Dr. Manzoor Abbas and Dr. Javed. Appellant in his statement recorded under section 324, Cr.P.C. While replying to question No.7 stated as under :--- "I have been falsely implicated in this false case. Some days prior to 7-5-2002 Niamat Masih submitted an application before the police of Police Station, Wahndo against me and it was in my knowledge. On 7-5-2002, police came to arrest me illegally and unlawfully without registration of case. On seeing the police, I tried to run away on which Liaqat Ali complainant of this case made a fire upon me, but the shot had hit one Nazar Hussain on his belly. When I saw that Nazar Hussain had been severely injured by the firing made by Liaqat Ali complainant, I surrendered myself before the police, who tortured me badly. There was apprehension that Nazar Hussain might not be survived, therefore, the complainant Liaqat Ali in order to save his skin, had concocted this false story that I attacked on the police with knife and in order to save his skin and to take plea that he (Liaqat Ali) tired in the exercise of his right of private defence, as the fire was hit on the vital part of the body of Nazar Hussain. I was not carrying any knife at the time of occurrence and I did not attack on any of the Police Officer. All the P.Ws. Are Police officials so they have deposed against me. "
8. Now it has become a case of two versions, one put forward by the appellant mentioned above and the other put forward by the prosecution mentioned in the F.I.R. If both the versions are put in juxtaposition, the version of the appellant seems to be more plausible, convincing one and nearer to the truth.
9. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence recorded by the learned trial Court I am of the considered opinion, that prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt because it is a case in which there are so many doubts and benefit of the same always goes in favour of the accused not as a matter of grace but as a matter of right, so while granting the same benefit I accept this appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant by the learned trial Court. He is in jail and he shall be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other case.