MUHAMMAD USMAN and another vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which upheld the conviction and death sentences of the petitioners, Muhammad Usman and Aftab Ahmad, for the murders of Ahmed Khan and Pervez Iqbal. The core legal question presented is whether the conviction of Muhammad Usman, based on ocular testimony from close relatives of the deceased, is sustainable in the absence of independent corroborative evidence, particularly when medical evidence and ballistic reports appear to create discrepancies regarding his involvement. The Supreme Court observed that while the ballistic report corroborated the involvement of Aftab Ahmad, no such independent evidence existed against Muhammad Usman. Consequently, the Court held that the case against Muhammad Usman requires a minute examination and a thorough reappraisal of the evidence. The Court granted leave to appeal to specifically re-evaluate the evidence on record to ensure that the conviction aligns with sound principles of criminal justice administration, emphasizing the necessity of independent corroboration when relying on interested witnesses in capital cases.
- Does the absence of independent corroborative evidence against one of several co-accused in a murder case necessitate a reappraisal of the evidence by the Supreme Court?
- Is the conviction of an accused based solely on the testimony of interested witnesses sustainable when medical and ballistic evidence fails to provide independent corroboration?
- Section 374, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment, dated 20-6-2006 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No,468 of 2000.
2. Petitioners Muhammad Usman and Aftab Ahmad were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Attock for causing murder of Ahmed Khan and Pervez Iqbal. Both of them were convicted and sentenced to death along with compensation etc. Appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by Lahore High Court, Lahore and the murder reference made by the trial Court under section 374, Cr.P.C. Was answered in the affirmative.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment both the petitioners have filed the above criminal petition for leave to appeal.
4. Mr. M.A. Zafar, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that ocular testimony of Mst. Naseer Begum and Mst. Farida Ahmed stands belied by the medical evidence. Secondly he submitted that in all eleven fire-arm entry wounds were found on the dead bodies of the deceased namely Ahmed Khan and Pervaiz Iqbal but only six empties were recovered from the place of incident and all the six empties recovered were fired from 8 mm rifle of petitioner Aftab Ahmed. It was further submitted by him that the eyewitnesses were close relatives of the deceased and safe administration of justice required independent corroboration of their evidence which is available as against petitioner Aftab Ahmed in the shape of report of Ballistic Expert report that the six empties recovered from the spot were fired from the .8 mm rifle recovered from petitioner Aftab Ahmed. However, no such corroborative evidence is available against petitioner Muhammad Usman and his conviction by the trial Court as well as by the High Court requires reconsideration to establish that it is based on sound principles of administration of criminal justice.
5. After taking into consideration the argument advanced by Mr. M.A. Zafar and perusal of the material on record we are of the opinion that the case insofar as it relates to conviction of accused Muhammad Usman requires to be minutely examined necessitating reappraisal and re- appreciation of evidence.
6. Accordingly leave to appeal is granted to reappraise the evidence on record.