SURUJ MIA AND Others vs KALAGAZI
This matter concerns a petition for special leave to appeal against an order of the High Court of East Pakistan, which had dismissed the petitioners' criminal revision against their conviction and sentence. The petitioners were convicted under Section 323 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for assaulting the complainant, Abdul Mannan, with iron rods and lathis. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts regarding the petitioners' guilt, based on the testimony of eye-witnesses and medical evidence, warranted interference by the Supreme Court in its appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the prosecution successfully established the case through credible eye-witness testimony, which was further corroborated by the independent medical evidence of the Medical Officer who examined the victim's injuries. Finding no merit in the petition, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the lower courts' reliance on the consistent evidence presented. The judgment reinforces the principle that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact when they are supported by reliable, corroborated evidence.
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts when evidence is corroborated?
- Is medical evidence sufficient to corroborate eye-witness testimony in assault cases?
- Section 323, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. M. R. KHAN, J.-The petitioners were convicted under section 323 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each. The petitioners' appeal against their convic--tion and sentences was dismissed. Their criminal revision was also dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of East Pakistan. The petitioners now seek special leave to appeal against the High Court's order dismissing the criminal revision.
2. The prosecution case was that while P. W. 2 Abdul Mannan was going to Narsingdi on the morning of the 14th August 1967, for making some purchases, he was surrounded and assaulted by the petitioners with iron rods and lathis. The petitioners admittedly bore grudge and enmity against Abdul Mannan and his uncle P. W. 1 Kala Gazi. The occurrence was witnessed by P. Ws. 1, 3, 4 and 5.
3. Both the Courts of fact believed the evidence of these eye-witnesses and that of the victim himself.
4. The Medical Officer of the Narsingdi Public Dispensary examined P. W. 2 and found two simple injuries on his person caused by blunt weapons. The medical evidence thus corroborated the evidence of the eye-witnesses. An attempt was made to belittle the doctor's evidence, but the Courts accepted his evidence as he was an independent witness.
5. The petition has no merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.