AYYUB KHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellant seeks to challenge his conviction and sentences imposed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Bali vide judgment dated 6.8.2003, convicting him for the offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C., and sentencing to rigorous imprisonment for life, and a fine of Rs. 1000.00 in default to undergo one month's further rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The necessary facts are that on 17.12.2001 at about 4.15 PM, one Han Mommamad lodged a written report at Police Station Khinwada alleging that at about 1.00 in the noon, he along with Umar Khan son of Jamsher Khan, and Jamal Khan were returning from the house of his Tau, Hasan Khan at Ranki Wala Well. At that time, his sister-in-law (ligt) Smt.Rozatoon was coming from the opposite direction carrying a Tagari containing cow dung, when she reached near Barloota Bala (water course), the appellant emereged from the ambush, who was having his Kunt in his hand, he started indiscriminately wielding injuries to Rozatoon. She raised a cry, and rushed as they were at some distance, but then the accused absconded. They found the victim lying on the ground with bleeding, and her head and forehead etc. were torn, the jaw was torn from nose to years and mouth. It is alleged that she was in senses and told to have been injured by the accused Ayub. According to the information, thereafter she was brought to the village, then Jamal was sent to Bagole to send a jeep, wherein she was carried to Magartalab Police Outpost, where-from they picked up two constables and were carried her to hospital at Sadri and enroute she collapsed. On this report, the appellants were arrested and after completing investigation challan was filed for the offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C. in the Court of Judl. Magistrate, Desuri, where-from it was committed to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Bali, who in turn transferred it to the learned trial Court. After committal, the charge under Sec. 302 I.P.C. was framed to which accused denied. The prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses and tendered in evidence number of documents. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence of the prosecution and hearing the accused found the accused guilty as above and convicted and sentenced him as above.

(3.) Assailing the impugned judgment, it was submitted that the whole thrust of the prosecution case is on the basis of the three alleged eye-witnesses being PW-1, Han Momammad Hamid Khan, the informant, PW-5 Umar Khan, and PW-6 Jamal Khan, but then their evidence is materially contradicted by PW-14, Hasan Khan, who is the Tau of the three witnesses, the husband of the deceased, being Fakir Mohammad, PW-11, and from the evidence of Dr. M.M. Jangid. According to the learned counsel if those evidences are considered in proper prospective, it would be clear that the conviction is wholly unsustainable.