Find a Lawyer

‑‑‑Ss. 307, 324, 325, 326, 148 & 149‑‑Nature of offence‑‑Only one incised injury on back of witness found grievous due to surgical emphsema developed later‑‑Injury not deep‑‑Injury basically simple‑‑ Nature of incident apparently, sudden fight‑‑Compromise effected between parties in Court‑‑Intention to murder any member of complainant party, held, could not be found‑‑Offences committed at the most would fall under S. 324/325, P.P.C. compoundable with permission of Court‑ Compounding of offences was allowed and accused acquitted in circumstances.

Ch. Muhammad Anwar Bhinder for Appellants.

Syed Zulfiqar Haider for the State.

Ghulam Rasool Warraich for the Complainant.

Date of hearing: 18th February, 1987.

This is an appeal by Mushtaq Ahmad and five others, appellants Nos. 1 to 6 against their conviction and sentences recorded under sections 307/ 149 and 148, P.P.C. and the special compensation order to be paid under section 544‑A, Cr.P.C.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that that Mushtaqj Ahmad, appellant, was Chairman of Zakat and Ushr Committee of village Kaloo Ghazi. In 1983 he was de-seated in the election by Ghulam Nabi resident of Kotli Tarar. Muhammad Anwar P.W.2 filed an application against said Mushtaq Ahmad, appellant, with regard to misappropriation of Zakat funds. The enquiry team came on inspection to the village on 28‑3‑1983. The said enquiry team first conducted proceedings in village Kaloo Ghazi and then in village Mahmoodpur and ultimately came to village Jallowah. During the proceedings of the said enquiry team in Masjid Jallowali, a quarrel developed between Muhammad Anwar P.W.2 and Mushtaq Ahmad, appellant, whereafter all the appellants, who were duly armed with daggers, a hatchet and Dandas, assaulted the complainant party and injured Muhammad Anwar P.W.2, Rehmat Ali P.W. 3 and Muhammad Shafi P.W. 4.

3. On 28‑1‑1987, a compromise was recorded in this Court between Manzoor Ahmad, complainant P.WA, Muhammad Anwar P.W. 2, Rehmat Ali P.W.3 and Muhammad Shafi P.W.4, on the one hand, and Mushtaq Ahmad and five others, appellants Nos. 1 to 6, on the other, when a petition (Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2 of 1987) for the suspension of the sentences of the said appellants came up before this Court. According to the compromise all the members of the complainant party, including the three injured P.Ws., forgave the appellants in the name of Allah and submitted that they had no objection if the appeal was accepted and the sentences of the appellants were suspended. In terms of the compromise, the petition for the suspension of the sentences of the appellants was accepted and they were released on bail, pending the final determination of their appeal.

4. On behalf of the appellants it is submitted that since the parties have compromised the matter, the appellants may be acquitted. In this connection it is submitted that only two grievous injuries are alleged to have been inflicted by the appellants, one on the left wrist of Muhammad Anwar P.W., which is by blunt weapon, whereas the second on Akhtar Ali P.W., is the result, of post‑surgical complication, which cannot be attributed to the knife injury.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection if the appellants are acquitted.

6. Learned counsel for the State, however, submits that the conviction of the appellants should be maintained, but their sentences may be reduced.

7. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, the complainant and the State and have also perused the record. One incised injury on the back of Rehmat Ali P.W.3, which is attributed to Bashir, appellant, was found to be grievous, because of surgical emphysema which had developed later. The dimensions of the said injury do not show that it was in any way deep. It appears that air bubbles having set in into the said wound, inflamation (emphysema) developed around the wound. The inflamation appears to be the result of poor surgical attention. Basically, the injury cannot be taken higher than a simple sharp‑edged' weapon injury. From the nature of the incident it is apparent that a sudden fight developed due to a quarrel which erupted between Muhammad Anwar P.W.2 and Mushtaq Ahmad, appellant. In these circumstances, it is' not possible to hold that the appellants wanted to murder any of the members of the complainant party. The offences committed at the highest level are under section 325/324, P.P.C. and both offences are compoundable with the permission of the Court. In view of the compromise, I hereby allow the compounding of the said offences. In the circumstances, the appellants are entitled to be acquitted.

8. For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is accepted and the conviction and sentences of Mushtaq Ahmad and five others, appellants Nos. 1 to 6, are set aside and they are acquitted. All the six appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged.

S.A./M‑64/L Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.