MUHAMMAD RAFIQ vs MUHAMMAD MANZOOR and others
This matter originated from a criminal appeal filed by the complainant, Muhammad Rafiq, challenging the acquittal of the respondents, Muhammad Manzoor and Irshad Ahmad, by the Federal Shariat Court. The respondents were initially tried and convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, for offences under sections 397 and 412 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an alleged incident of Harabah involving the theft of a vehicle and cash. The Federal Shariat Court subsequently set aside these convictions, granting the accused the benefit of doubt due to existing enmity between the parties and the prosecution's failure to meet the evidentiary standard of Tazkia-al-Shuhood required for Hudood offences. The Supreme Court of Pakistan reviewed the evidence and the judgment of the Federal Shariat Court. Finding no legal infirmity or misappreciation of evidence in the lower appellate court's reasoning, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal. The Court affirmed that where the prosecution evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in cases involving prior litigation and animosity, the benefit of doubt must be extended to the accused, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
- Can a conviction be sustained when the prosecution evidence fails to meet the standard of Tazkia-al-Shuhood in Hudood cases?
- Does the existence of prior litigation and enmity between parties warrant the extension of the benefit of doubt to the accused?
- Is the appellate court justified in setting aside a conviction if the trial court's assessment of evidence is found to be unreliable?
- Section 17, Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337(a)(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 397, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 412, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
DR. ALLAMA KHALID MEHMOOD (MEMBER). --- Muhammad Rafiq, the complainant made a report against Muhammad Manzoor son of Ghulam Qadir and Irshad Ahmad son of Abdul Ghafoor at Police Station, Basti Malook, Multan for committing Harabah at the complainant on 11-1-1998 at about 4-00 a.m. F.I.R. No,7/98 was registered under section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and under sections 307/ 337(a)(ii), P.P.C. The complainant claimed that the accused along with their two other fellows committed Harabah by snatching a Pajero Jeep from him along with a purse containing Rs,35,000 and some other articles.
2. The accused Muhammad Manzoor and Irshad Ahmad were arrested on 5-4-1998 and they pleaded not guilty and demanded trial. They were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan and were sentenced under section 397, P.P.C. For seven years' R.I. They were also awarded a sentence of three years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,3,000 each under section 412, P.P.C. They were allowed benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Both the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Against the judgment of the learned trial Court the convicts tiled an appeal before the Federal Shariat Court. Their case was heard on 16-3-2001 and the learned Federal Shariat Court giving them the benefit of doubt allowed the appeal setting aside their conviction and sentences awarded to them under sections 397 and 412, P.P.C.
4. The respondent proved that the complainant and the accused had already an enmity between them and they were on litigation against each other and the complaint cannot be considered beyond doubts. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had also observed that on the basis of the evidence on record the accused could not be convicted under section 17 of the Offences against Property Ordinance, 1979. He also observed that the evidence available on the record is not fulfilling the conditions of Tazkia-al-Shuhood.
5. We have carefully gone through the judgment of the learned Federal Shariat Court whereby the conviction and sentences awarded to the accused were set aside and they were acquitted of the charge of extending them the benefit of doubt. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant Muhammad Rafiq and in the light of the evidence on record we find no ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Federal Shariat Court. Accordingly the appeal against the judgment of the learned Federal Shariat Court stands dismissed.