ABDUL SATTAR Versus THE STATE
In brief the facts of this case are stated below:‑
The present case was registered on the basis of statement Exh. PA recorded by A.S.I. Hussain Ali P.W. 11 at Chowk Civil Hospital Daska at about 12.35 p.m. on 27‑7‑1985 at the instance of Mst. Noor Bibi P.W.7 regarding an occurrence which allegedly took place 10/12 days earlier at about 12 noon in village Sandhanwala about ten miles from Police Station Daska, District Sialkot. It was stated by Mst. Nawab Bibi in her statement that she was married to Khadim Hussain about 4/5 years earlier and had come to see her brother Muhammad Aslam deceased m village Sandhanwala. About 10/12 days earlier Muhammad Aslam went to the well of Muhammad Sarwar for paddy sowing. Muhammad Ilyas, Naseeb Khan and Sattar accused were also sowing paddy in another field of the said well. She took meals for her brother. A short while thereafter the three accused armed with sticks came there. They challenged Muhammad Aslam who was having meals and started inflicting Sota blows on his person. Muhammad Aslam fell down. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Ramzan and Islamuddin P.Ws.
The motive was stated to be that Naseeb Khan accused wanted his neighbour Muhammad Aslam deceased to vacate his house and hand over the property to him. Muhammad Aslam did not agree to this suggestion.
After the occurrence the respectables of the village initiated compromise between the parties but did not succeed. Mst. Noor Bibi, therefore, got the present case registered against the accused.
2. Muhammad Aslam was taken to Civil Hospital Daska on 15‑7‑1981 for treatment and examination. He was admitted by D.W.2 Dr. Muhammad Iftikhar Ahmad in Hospital as indoor patient. However, on 21‑7‑1985 the relatives of Muhammad Adam took him back home at their own risk vide the statement a Exh.DE/1. Muhammad Aslam aged 30 years was again brought to hospital on 24‑'7‑1985. He was medically examined on that day at about 4 p.m. by P.W.5 Dr. Imtiaz Ahmad Bhatti. On external examination the medical officer found 5 blunt weapon injuries of 8 to 10 days duration on his person. Injury No.4 was a healed abrasion 5 cm x 5 cm on the back of lumbar region lower part and injury No.5 was healed abrasion 5 cm x 3 cm on back of neck. The other three injuries were abrasions on left leg and right knee. Injuries Nos. 4 and 5 were kept under observation. The remaining injuries were simple in nature. Injury No.4 was later found simple but injury No.5 was declared grievous/fatal. Muhammad Aslam died in hospital on 2‑9‑1985. His dead body was sent for post‑mortem examination after necessary formalities which was conducted by P.W.12 Dr. Tariq Latif on 3‑9‑1985 at 1‑30 a.m. The medical officer on external examination noted bedsore on skull; bruise on left side of neck and a white scar on upper part of left leg. Nothing was detected on internal examination of the body. The cause of death was left to be ascertained and confirmed after the report of Bacteriologist who sent his report on 23‑10‑1985. The medical officer, therefore, opined that death was due to Lobar Pneumonia resultant from prolonged incapacitation due to injury of spinal cord in servical region. The time between injury and death was about 1‑1/2 to 2 months and post‑mortem was conducted in about 12 to 24 hours of death.
The accused were challaned after completion of investigation.
3. In support of its case prosecution examined 12 witnesses in all. P.W.7 Noor Bibi, P.W.8 Muhammad Ramzan and P.W.9 Islamuddin are eye‑witnesses of the occurrence. P.W.5 Dr. Imtiaz Ahmad Bhatti, medically examined Muhammad Aslam deceased on 24‑7‑1985. The post‑mortem was conducted by P.W.12 Dr. Tariq Latif. The case was investigated by A.S.I. Hussain Ali. The evidence of the rest of the witnesses was of formal nature.
4. The accused when examined after close of prosecution evidence pleaded innocence and denied the charge. They examined Dr. Gulnawaz D.W.1 and Dr. Muhammad Iftikhar Ahmad D.W.2 in defence.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, vide the impugned judgment dated 12‑7‑1986 came to the conclusion that the occurrence took place all of a sudden without any premeditation or motive. He, therefore, sentenced all the three accused to suffer 10 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 5,000 or in default one year R.I. each under section 304 (I), P.P.C.
5. Abdul Sattar and Naseeb Khan filed Crl. Appeal No. 486 of 1986 and Muhammad Ilyas filed Crl. Appeal No. 680 of 1986 to challenge their con Action and sentence. The two appeals are directed against one judgment and will, therefore, be decided together.
6. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have also perused the record.
The present case was registered on 27‑7‑1985 regarding an occurrence which took place about 10/12 days earlier. Muhammad Aslam deceased whop. still alive was for the First time taken to Civil Hospital Daska where he was admitted for treatment on 15‑7‑19fii It was given out by the persons accompanying Muhammad Aslam at that time that it was a case of accidental, jury. This fact was accordingly recorded in the bed‑head‑ticket. Muhammad Aslam was then taken back to his house by his relatives on 21‑7‑1985 at their own risk vide the statement Exh.DE/1. These facts are borne out from the statements of D.W.1 Dr. Gulnawaz Bajwa and D.W.2 Dr. Muhammad Iftikhar. It appears;' that, as the relatives of Muhammad Aslam had told the medical officer, that is was a case of accidental injury, no medico‑legal examination was undertaken at that time. The condition of Muhammad Aslam deteriorated and as such he was again brought to hospital three days thereafter i.e. on 24‑7‑1985. fie was then medically examined by Dr. Imtiaz Ahmad Bhatti P.W.5. The case was registered on 27‑7‑1985. The delay in lodging of F.I.R. in my view, materially affected the merits of this case. Muhammad Aslam died in hospital on 2‑9‑1985 not as a result' of the injuries on his person but on account of prolonged incapacitation due to injury to the spinal cord.
Mst. Noor Bibi complainant is sister of the deceased while Muhammad Ramzan P.W.8 and Islamuddin P.W.9, both brothers, are cousins of the deceased. Some other persons were present near the place of occurrence but no one has come forward to support the prosecution case. These three eye‑witnesses made material improvements in their statement during the trial. Muhammad Ramzan and Islamuddin P.Ws. had stated before the police that they had gone to see Muhammad Sarwar when they saw the present occurrence. In their statements during trial they stated that they were sowing paddy when this occurrence took place. They did not state before the police that the accused were also sowing paddy before the occurrence. It was stated by them during trial that there was some quarrel between the parties before Muhammad Aslam was given stick blows but this fact was not stated by them before the police. Mst. Noor Bibi P.W.7 resides with her husband in District Sargodha. She also made material improvements in her statement during the trial. It appears that she came to , village on hearing the injuries on the person of her brother, and then reported the ' matter to slice after delay of many days. It was admitted by A.S.I. Hussain Ali P.W.11, that Ilyas and Naeb Khan accused were found innocent by the police and that no crime weapon was recovered from the accused. He further admitted that during the investigation it transpired that Abdul Sattar and the deceased had grappled with each other while joking. Abdul Sattar did not cause the deceased any injury intentionally and it was due to fall out of joke which caused injuries to the deceased." P.W.12 Dr. Tariq Latif on external examination found Muhammad I Adam to be a young man of weak physique. It, therefore, appears that only Abdul, Sattar accused had caused injuries to Muhammad Aslam deceased by giving him a push on account of which he fell down and got his spinal cord injured.
7. In view of the above discussion I am of the view that only Abdul Sattar accused was present at the place of occurrence. He gave a push to Muhammad Aslam deceased who fell down and got injuries on his person. Abdul Sattar is accordingly held guilty of offence under section 325, P.P.C. He remained in judicial lock‑up for some time during the trial. After his conviction vide the impugned judgment dated 12‑7‑1986, he is in prison serving imprisonment. This means that he has already suffered about 1‑1/2 years under the impugned judgment. I, therefore, sentence him to imprisonment already undergone by him and fine of Rs.5,000 or in default one year R.I. under section 325, P.P.C. The Criminal Appeal 486 of 1986 on his behalf is dismissed subject to above ' modification. The appeal of Naseeb Khan is accepted. He is acquitted from the charge. He shall be released from prison fortwith if not required in any other case.
8. Criminal Appeal No.680 of 1986 on behalf of Muhammad Ilyas accused is accepted. He is acquitted from the charge. He is on bail. His bail and surety bonds shall stand discharged.
SA./A‑275/L Appeal partly accepted.