IMDAD HUSSAIN Versus THE STATE
KAMAL MUSTAFA BOKHARI, J .--This is an appeal by Imdad Hussain son of Jhandoo Khan and Muhammad Akram alias Ashraf alias Ashiq alias Achian son of Ghulam Nabi, residents of Faisalabad City, against the order, dated 6-10-1987, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, whereby they were convicted under section 18 read with section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default of its payment to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months each. On further conviction by the same judgment under section 457, P.P.C. they were sentenced to further rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default of its payment to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each. They were given benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Aziz-ur-Rehman with his family lived in house No. 265-E, Suleman Chowk, Ghulam Muhammad Abad, Faisalabad. As usual on 29-9-1982 he and his son Muhammad Yousaf were lying on the roof of his house while his minor daughter Mst. Shahida, his wife, Mst, Ameena Begum and his son Muhammad Abbas were lying in the courtyard of the same house. Muhammad Abbas went towards Chowk to purchase cigarettes. The main door of the house was not bolted. At about 11-00 p.m. Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala (since died) and the appellants entered in house of Aziz-ur-Rehman. Name of Muhammad Akram, appellant was not mentioned but it was stated that he could be identified. Imdad Hussain, appellant placed his Chhuri on the neck of his wife while Muhammad lqbal alias Kala put his Chhuri on the neck of his daughter, Mst. Shahida aged 12/13 years. They threatened them not to raise noise and commanded the minor girl to accompany them for sexual intercourse. The un-known person (Muhammad Akram appellant) tried to drag Mst. Shahida by catching her from arm. In the meanwhile Muhammad Abbas reached back. Aziz ur-Rehman and his son Muhammad Yousaf were attracted on the alarm raised by children and came down from the roof. They picked up whatsoever they could find from the courtyard and raised lalkara towards the accused who were identified by them and by their children in the light of electric bulb. Imdad Hussain appellant and unknown person (Muhammad Akram, appellant) succeeded in escaping by pushing Muhammad Abbas. Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala attempted to attack Muhammad Abbas with a Chhuri. Meanwhile, Aziz-ur-Rehman and his son Muhammad Yousaf reached there and in order to rescue Muhammad Abbas they attacked Muhammad lqbal alias Kala with a Lathi and hockey. Muhammad Iqbal ran out of the house and fell down on the road. The aforementioned facts contained on the written application of Aziz-ur-Rehman were entered in daily diary at S.No. 25, dated 29-9-1982 of the Police Station Gulberg, Faisalabad because earlier to,; it a first information report about murder of Muhammad lqbal alias Kala had been registered at the same police station against Aziz-ur Rehman and his sons Muhammad Abbas and Muhammad Yousaf. On the same day in supplementary statement Aziz-ur-Rehman named Muhammad Akram, appellant, whose name was not originally mentioned by him in his application on which report was entered in daily diary of police station. Thereafter, investigation was conducted and appellants were challaned in Court. They were charged for lurking house-trespass under section 457, P.P.C. and for abduction of Mst. Shahida under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
3. The prosecution examined six witnesses to prove its case at the trial. Ghazanfar Abbas, A.S.I. , had recorded report No. 25, dated 29-9-1982 in the daily diary of Police Station Gulberg, Faisalabad. Barkhurdar Ahmad, Moharrir Head Constable, of the same police station proved investigation made by Muhammad Bashir, A.S.I. (since died).
Aziz-ur-Rehman, first informant and his son, Muhammad Abbas, were examined as eye-witnesses as well as their two close neighbours, Abdul Majid and Shaukat Ali who had witnessed the occurrence. Aziz-ur-Rehman narrated the facts stated by him in the first information report. He deposed- that the appellants alongwith Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala entered 4his house at 11-00 p.m. on the day of occurrence and attempted to abduct his minor daughter, Mst. Shahida, aged about 12/13 years and in the occurrence Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala suffered injuries with stick and hockey given by him and his son, Muhammad Yousaf, but the appellants escaped. He also stated that he previously knew Muhammad Akram but had forgotton his name when he drafted the report to the police and mentioned his name in the supplementary statement recorded by the police soon thereafter on the same day. His son, Muhammad Abbas, corroborated him. He deposed that about 11 p.m., on the day of occurrence he had gone to fetch cigarettes and when he returned he found the appellants with Muhammad lqbal alias Kala present in his house, Imdad Hussain had put a chhuri on the neck of his mother, while Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala had put a Chhuri on the neck of his minor sister, Mst. Shahida and they were threatening them not to raise noise otherwise they will be put to death. Muhammad Akram, appellant then attempted to drag away Mst. Shahida with a bad intention. In the meanwhile his father and brother, Aziz-ur-Rehman and Muhammad Yousaf, P.Ws. reached the spot and rescued her after giving stick and hockey blows to Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala because the appellants succeeded in running away. Abdul Majid stated that he was walking in the Muhammadi Park, situated about 15 karams away from the house of first informant, when they saw in the electric light that Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala accompanied by the appellants entered house of Aziz-ur-Rehman, P.W. and then they heard noise from inside that house. They also saw the appellants going towards Ghazi Abad after coming out of the house of the first informant while Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala came out of the house in injured condition and fell down near the house of Aziz-ur-Rehman. Shaukat Ali, a neighbour of the first informant, deposed that he was present in the balcony of his house at the time of occurrence when he saw the appellants with Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala entering house of Aziz-ur-Rehman and after some time appellants were seen leaving the house who escaped while Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala after he was seen coming out of the house who fell down in injured condition.
4. The appellants pleaded not guilty to the charges. Both of them stated that they had been implicated due to enmity in order to create defence in, murder of Muhammad lqbal alias Kala. They did not appear as their own witnesses and none of them led any evidence in his defence.
5. On behalf of the appellants it was argued that Muhammad Akram, appellant, was not named in the first information report; that Chhuri of Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala was not recovered in the case; that Mst. Shahida was not examined although she was victim of the assault; and that Aziz-ur-Rehman, first informant could not give name of the person who wrote application on his behalf although his two sons, Muhammad Abbas and Muhammad Yousaf were literate, and were present on the spot.
6. We were taken through the evidence by the learned counsel for the appellants and have perused it. The name of Muhammad Akram appellant, was not originally mentioned in the first information report but it was given to the police on the same day. Muhammad Akram. appellant, was previously known to the first informant who had A forgotten his name. He got the application written by someone which is not unusual. No enmity existed between the parties and there existed no reason for the prosecution witnesses to implicate the appellants. Aziz-ur-Rehman and his son were natural witnesses o. the occurrence. They both consistently deposed against the appellants. Their testimony was corroborated by their close neighbours, Abdul Majid and Shaukat Ali, who had no ill-will against the appellants as to falsely involve them or substitute them for the real culprits. All four of them were natural witnesses of the occurrence whose presence at spot cannot be doubted. Their testimony is uniform and confidence inspiring. Mst. Shahida was a minor girl. The failure of prosecution to recover Chhuri of Muhammad Iqbal alias Kala did not create doubt in favour of the appellants. The first informant and his sons were no doubt literate, Aziz-ur-Rehman had studied upto 6th class while his son, Muhammad Abbas was a matriculate which would not be enough qualification for drafting a complaint particularly when they were affected persons. We are satisfied that prosecution had established its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court rightly convicted and sentenced them.
7. In view of the above we find no merit in this appeal and dismiss it.
S.A./388/F.Sh Appeal dismissed.