Munawar Ali vs Ali Dost And Other
This petition arises from an order of the High Court of Sindh dismissing a criminal revision application filed against the dismissal of a private complaint instituted by the petitioner under sections 324, 147, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the Trial Court and the High Court were justified in dismissing the private complaint at the preliminary stage by deeply appreciating the evidence. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, holding that deep appreciation of evidence is not warranted at the preliminary stage when sufficient incriminating evidence, including the complainant's statement under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and medical evidence, is available to put the accused on trial. The case was accordingly remanded to the Trial Court for expeditious disposal. The key principle laid down is that complaints should not be summarily dismissed at the preliminary stage where prima facie incriminating evidence exists.
- Whether deep appreciation of evidence is warranted at the preliminary stage of a private complaint?
- Can a private complaint be summarily dismissed for want of incriminating evidence when statements under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and medical evidence are available?
- Under what circumstances should a criminal matter be remanded to the Trial Court for fresh proceedings?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 200, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHARY, CJ.- This petition arises out of order dated 17th May, 2004 passed by learned High Court of Sindh, Hyderabad Circuit, whereby Criminal Revision Application No. 11 of 2004 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Petitioner instituted private complaint against the respondents on 12.1.2004 for initiating proceedings in accordance with law on account of allegedly committing offence under sections 324, 147, 149 and 109 PPC which was dismissed on 12.1.2005. It is to be noted that prior to filing of the complaint FIR No. 52 of 2003 was lodged in respect of the same incident on 29.11.2003 but statedly no action was taken and after arrest of the accused they were released. Thus it persuaded to file a private complainant against them.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that sufficient incriminating evidence was produced prima facie to involve the respondents in the commission of offence but the evidence against the respondents was discarded by the Trial Court. Similarly the learned High Court at preliminary stage of the case had examined in depth the evidence of the complainant and concluded on the basis thereof that no case is made out against the respondents contrary to the settled principle of law that if incriminating evidence sufficient to put the accused to trial is available then deep appreciation of evidence is not warranted.
4. Learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh also felt difficulty in supporting the impugned order.
However, he stated that there is no incriminating evidence for recording convictions against the respondents, therefore, the complaint of the petitioner was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order as well as order passed by the Trial Court and other material so made available on record. In our considered opinion it is not a case of the category in which the complaint should have be dismissed out rightly for want of incriminating evidence particularly in view of the statement of the complainant under section 200 Cr.P.C. And the medical evidence available on record and the Trial Court may have been given opportunity to proceed with the matter and then to decide the fate of the Case. Therefore, without going into merits of the case in depth it is appropriate to remand the case to the Trial Court for proceedings with the complaint expeditiously and dispose of the matter as far as possible within a period of three months.
6. In view of the above discussion, petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside the case is remanded to the Additional Sessions Judge, Nawabshah with the direction to disposed of the matter keeping in view the observations made hereinabove.