MUHAMMAD SABIR vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the petitioner, Muhammad Sabir, challenging his conviction and sentence. The core legal questions raised concern the reliability of the prosecution's evidence, specifically the non-nomination of the petitioner and other co-accused in the First Information Report (FIR), the acquittal of co-accused on the same evidence, the failure of the prosecution and the Investigating Officer to disclose the source of information linking the petitioner to the offence, and an unexplained delay in conducting the identification test. The Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal to reappraise and re-evaluate the evidence in detail to ensure the safe administration of criminal justice.
- Whether a conviction can be safely sustained when co-accused are acquitted on the same set of evidence?
- Whether the prosecution's failure to disclose the source of information linking an accused to an offence affects the credibility of the investigation?
- What is the legal effect of an unexplained delay in conducting an identification test of an accused not named in the FIR?
ORDER
' In support of grant of leave, learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contended that:
(1) In this case neither petitioner Muhammad Sabir nor acquitted accused Mst. Shaista Zeb, Aftab Ahmad and proclaimed offenders namely, Ajmal and Mehmood were nominated in the F.I.R.
Petitioner was convicted and sentenced whereas Mst. Shaista Zeb and Aftab were acquitted on the same evidence;
(2) Prosecution has not disclosed any source about involvement of petitioner or that of other accused in offence. Even Investigating ' Officer Muhammad Razzaq (P. W.15) has not shown the source of involvement of petitioner in the offence; and
(3) Identification test has been held after a considerable delay for which no explanation has been furnished.
2. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted to reappraise and reevaluate the evidence in detail for the safe administration of criminal justice.