ASAD NAVEED alias DANGAR vs THE STATE
This matter involves two cross-petitions: one filed by the convict, Asad Naveed, seeking acquittal, and another by the complainant seeking enhancement of the convict's sentence. The core legal question concerns the propriety of the High Court's judgment, which maintained the conviction and sentence of the petitioner despite finding that both the complainant and the accused had suppressed facts and failed to approach the court with clean hands. The High Court had concluded that while the prosecution's version was not entirely credible, the petitioner was responsible for the fatal shot, yet it declined to enhance the sentence, citing the absence of an appeal by the State or complainant against the petitioner's acquittal under specific subsections of the Pakistan Penal Code. Upon review, the Supreme Court determined that the case warrants a comprehensive reappraisal of the evidence. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal in both petitions to examine the findings of the High Court and the evidentiary basis for the conviction and sentencing, thereby setting the stage for a full hearing on the merits of the cross-petitions.
- Does the suppression of facts by both parties in a criminal case necessitate a reappraisal of evidence by the Supreme Court?
- Can a sentence be enhanced if no appeal against the acquittal of a more serious charge has been filed by the State or complainant?
- Section 302(a), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(c), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' By this common order, we propose to decide both the titled petitions.
2. ' The petitioner-convict Asad Naveed has filed Criminal Petition No,660-L of 2002 seeking his acquittal whereas Criminal Petition No,661-L of 2002 has been filed by the complainant for enhancement of his sentence. The learned Judge of the High Court came to the following conclusions in the impugned judgment:-- "If I believe the version of the Tariq appellant mentioned above in totality then it becomes a case of acquittal but according to my considered opinion, neither the complainant party nor accused approached the Court with clean hands. Both are telling a lie, they have suppressed their role at the time of occurrence. In my considered opinion, fight had taken place only between Asad Naveed and Shah Hussain deceased and it was Asad Naveed who fired a fatal shot on the person of the deceased. Had the other four accused persons were having with them fire-arms then the damage should have been at a very large scale, as I have held in earlier paragraph that both the parties have not approached with clean hands. Asad Naveed alias Dangar had already been awarded maximum sentence under section 302(c), P.P.C. So I cannot sentence him to undergo death as held me in the earlier paragraph because no appeal against his acquittal under section 302(a) or (b), P.P.C. Has been filed by the State or the for the complainant, so conviction and sentence recorded against Asad Naveed alias Dangar appellant by the learned trial Court is maintained."
3. In our view, it is a fit case for reappraisal of evidence, A therefore, leave is granted in both the cases.