MUJIB-UR-REHMAN vs THE STATE and another
This criminal revision petition arose from an impugned order passed by the Sessions Judge, Lakki Marwat, whereby the accused respondent was relieved of trial for the time being in a murder case registered under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, based on a police inquiry and verification of his plea of alibi. The core legal question was whether the trial court lawfully relieved the accused from trial based on the police report and material collected during investigation reflecting his innocence. The Peshawar High Court held that while a mere police opinion on innocence lacks persuasive value, where such opinion is founded upon sound material and proper verification collected during investigation, the trial court's exercise of discretion to relieve the accused for the time being is legally sustainable. The court laid down the principle that a trial court's well-reasoned order releasing an accused based on substantiated police verification during investigation warrants no interference in revision absent compelling contrary grounds.
- Whether the opinion of the police regarding the innocence of an accused has persuasive value for the court?
- Can a trial court relieve an accused from trial based on a police inquiry and verification of a plea of alibi?
- Does a well-reasoned order of a trial court releasing an accused for the time being warrant interference in criminal revision?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. ' Mujib-ur-Rehman, petitioner, is aggrieved of the impugned order of the learned Sessions Judge, Lakki Marwat dated 14-12-2004 vide which the accused/respondent Asmatullah has been relieved of trial in case F.I.R. No,160 dated 22-8-2003 under section 302/34, P.P.C. P.S. Ghazni Khel on the basis of opinion/inquiry of the police.
2. ' The accused/respondent along with another co-accused namely Abdul Malik were charged for committing the murder of the father of the complainant in the above noted F.I.R. The accused/respondent when came to know about the charge against him, he himself surrendered to the police and from the very first day raised the plea of alibi in his favor. According to him he was in Punjab from 20-8-2003 to 15-9-2003 in connection with the collection of wheat to be brought to D.I.
3. Khan. On the application of the accused/respondent from jail, the verification of his plea of alibi was entrusted to Inspector Bashir Ahmad, who collected bilties of goods forwarding agency Minchin Abad Bahawalnagar wherefrom accused Asmatullah brought wheat to D.I. Khan. The Investigating Officer after proper verification certified the innocence of the accused/respondent in the case. Accordingly, he was placed in column 2 of the challan. When the case was put in Court for trial, both the accused were summoned, but vide impugned order, dated 14-12-2004 the learned trial Judge relieved the accused/respondent for the time being and to put to trial if some material evidence was brought on record against him. The other co-accused was supplied copies of the relevant documents and the case was fixed for framing of charge. The petitioner is aggrieved of the aforesaid impugned order of the learned trial Court and has now filed the instant criminal revision.
4. ' I have heard arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.
5. ' No doubt mere opinion about the innocence of an accused person has no persuasive value for the Court, but here in this case the opinion of the police is based on sound material collected during the investigation. The police has thus, showed innocence of the accused/respondent with proper reasons and if in the circumstances the learned trial Judge has exercised his powers available to him under the law, the same cannot be declared as illegal by this Court in absence of any good reasons, I therefore, see no good ground for interference in the well-reasoned order of the learned trial Court whereby accused/respondent Asmatullah has been relieved for the time being and the criminal revision is, therefore, dismissed.