Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1984, decided on 15th February, 1984.
--S. 324/323--Medical evidence showing that injuries caused to complainant were minor, simple in nature and were caused with blunt weapon--Offence, held, would fall under S. 323, P.P.C. and not 324, Penal Code--Conviction o accused converted accordingly.
---S. 323--Sentence--Accused remaining in jai for twenty-four days before and after his conviction--Appeal of accused coming up for disposal after five years- -Se itence reduced to one already undergone.
Nazir Hussain v. The State 1983 S C M R 36 rel.
Mohammad Hayat Junejo for Appellant.
Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui for the State.
Date of hearing: 15th February, 1987.
The appellant was charged under section 307, P.P.C. for having caused injuries to complainant Mohammad Umer, and was tried before the learned Sessions Judge, Sanghar, who by his judgment, dated 20-3 1984 convicted the appellant under section 324, P.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of 842;000 or in default of payment of fine to suffer further R.I. for one year. This appeal is directed against the above judgment of conviction.
The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 26-2 1983 Mohammad Umer complainant lodged a report at P .S. Perumal, Taluka Sanghar at about 6-30 p.m. inter alia alleging therein that at about 4-00 p.m. he was sitting on a cot after fosting, accused suddenly appeared and started giving him Lathi blows. The complainant raised cries which attracted P.W. Photo and Ghulam Ali who were sleeping at a short distance in front of their shops. The motive according to the F.I.R. was that on previous evening accused had visited his hotel at about 6-00 p.m. and asked the complainant to prepare tea for him but he refused to do so, on which accused was annoyed and went away after exchange of hot words. In order to take revenge, the accused assaulted the complainant and caused him injuries. The complainant then went to P.S. Perumal and lodged his report which was recorded by incharge S.H.O. Ameer Ali. S.H.O. Ameer Ali then prepared Mashirnama of injuries on the person of complainant in presence of Mashirs Dost Ali and Sodo, and then referred him to Civil Hospital for examination, medical treatment and certificate. The S.H.O. inspected Vardat on the next day and prepared such Mashirnama in presence of the above Mashirs. On 27-6-1983 he recorded the statements of P.Ws. Ghulam Ali, Haji Mir Mohammad and others. On 29-6-1983 the appellant was arrested by S.H.O. from Samaro Shakh Bridge and prepared such Mashirnama in presence of Mashir Sodo and Misri. He also secured a Lathi from the possession of the appellant. After receipt of medical certificate, and completion of necessary investigation, the appellant was challaned in Court to stand his trial.
A formal charge under section 307, P.P.C. was framed against the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty.
At the trial prosecution examined P.W. 1 Dr. Ratan Kumar' who had examined the complainant ha has produced the initial medical certificate as Exh.6 and final certificate as Exh.7. P.W.2 Mohammad Umer complainant, who has supported the contents of F.I.R. and has also produced the F.I.R. as Exh.9, P.W.3 Photo (is an eye-witness), P.W.4 Ghulam Ali (is an eye-witness), P.W.5 Ameer Ali S.H.O. who had conducted the investigation. He has produced Mashirnama of injuries Exh.13, Mashirnama of Vardat Exh.14, Mashirnama of arrest accused and production of Lathi Exh.15, P.W.6 Dost Ali had acted as '.a :shit of injuries and Vardat.
After close of the prosecution case, statement of appellant was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. in which he denied the allegation and has further stated that complainant was annoyed with him over charging of excessive interest from his Haris on which the accused told, Am that he should not do so, as it was unfair, on which the complainant threatened him of dire consequences and therefore, he has been falsely implicated.
P.W. 1 Dr. Ratan Kumar has stated in his stated that the examined complainant Mohammad Umer on 26-6-1983, and had found the following injuries on his person:
(1) Lacerated wound at the back right ear 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m.
(2) Lacerated wound at the front of right ear 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m.
(3) Contusion at the right thigh 3 c.m. x 2 c.m.
(4) Contusion at the right shoulder 16 c.m. x 6 c.m.
According to him the injuries were simple in nature and appeared to have been caused by blunt substance such as Lathi. P.W. 2 Umer complainant in his deposition has fully supported his F.I.R.
I have heard Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Akhlaq Ahmed, learned counsel for the State.
The only contention raised by Mr. Mohammad Hayat, Junejo learned a rued counsel for the appellant is that according to the medical officer the injuries on the person of the complainant were caused by blunt weapon and were simple in nature, therefore, the offence, if any, will fall under section 323, P.P.C. That the appellant has remained in jail after conviction from 20-3-1984 to 2-4-1984, and the incident took place nearly four years back, and, therefore, it will not be in the interest of justice that the appellant should be sent back to serve his remaining sentence.
Mr. Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui appearing for the State has contended that in view of the medical evidence offence if any, will fall tinder section 323, P.P.C. and since the incident took place in June 1983, and appellant has remained in jail from 20- 3-1984 to 2-4-1984, the sentence already undergone will meet the ends of justice.
I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel and have also gone through the R&P of the case.
Admittedly the medical evidence shows that the injuries caused to the complainant Mohammed Umer were view of the medical evidence the offence will fall under section P.P.C In 323, P.P.C.
The appellant was arrested on 29-6-1983 and was released on bail on 7-7-1983. He was convicted on 20-3-1984 and remained in jail from 2-3 - 1984 conviction. In view of the fact that the appellant 1984 to 2-4-1984 after his conviction. In view of the fact that the appellant has remained in jail for nearly 24 days and the appeal has come up for disposal after four year. I am of the considered view that the sentence; already undergone will meet the ends of justice. Reliance is also placed on Nazir Hussain v. The State 1983 SCMR 36.
I, therefore, convert the conviction and sentence of the appellant tom section 324, P.P.C. to section 323, P.P.C., and reduce the same to one already undergone. With this modification in sentence the above appeal is dismissed.
I had announced the above judgment by a short order, dated 15-2 1987 and these are the reasons for the same.
M.Y.H./M-145/K Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer