This matter arose from two criminal petitions seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of respondents previously convicted for murder under Section 302(b) PPC. The prosecution alleged that the wife of the deceased, in conspiracy with two others, murdered her husband to acquire his property. The trial court had convicted the respondents, sentencing one to death and two to life imprisonment. However, the High Court overturned these convictions, citing a failure to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the petitions, examined the ocular account provided by three eye-witnesses. The Court observed that the witnesses failed to report the occurrence for several days and did not accompany the deceased for post-mortem examination, rendering their presence at the scene doubtful. Furthermore, the Court noted material improvements in the witnesses' testimony regarding the site of the injury to align with medical evidence. The Court held that the High Court's findings were neither conjectural nor arbitrary, affirming that acquittal is unexceptionable when ocular evidence is inconsistent and delayed.
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---This order shall dispose of Criminal Petitions Nos. 433-L and 434-L of 2009 as they arose out of the same case registered vide F.I.R. No,187 of 2001 under sections 302/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Ravi Road, Lahore on the statement of Ghulam Fatima wife of Abdul Latif deceased who alleged that on the fateful day and time, the accused mentioned in the F.I.R.
Entered their house and committed the murder of her husband in the manner as narrated. During investigation, however, the said complainant along with other two respondents were challenged.- During trial the case of Muhammad Jehangir respondent being a juvenile was separated and ultimately the learned trial Court vide two separate judgments convicted the respondents under section 302(b), P.P.C. And while sentencing Ghulam Fatima and Muhammad Jehangir to life imprisonment, sentenced Muhammad Yaseen to death. The learned High Court allowed both the appeals and acquitted all the respondents as it found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt to sustain conviction.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that the learned High Court has acquitted the respondents for reasons not sustainable in law and that it was a case in which the wife of the deceased namely respondent No, 2 along with two other co-accused conspired and caused the death of her husband with a view to grab the property. Learned counsel added that the three eye-witnesses have been disbelieved merely because they did not accompany the dead body to the hospital for postmortem examination although they remained consistent on all material particulars.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, we find that the three witnesses who furnished the ocular account namely P .W.4 Hafiz Shahid Mehmood, P .W.7 Dost Muhammad and P .W.9 Wajahat Ali, if had seen the occurrence, nothing prevented them to get the case registered the same day instead they waited for 2/3 days to have their statements recorded. Their presence becomes further doubtful as none of them accompanied Abdul Latif deceased to the hospital for postmortem examination. This quality of ocular account was sought to be corroborated by the medical evidence which the learned High Court A found to be in conflict with the ocular account inasmuch as in their statements before the police under section 161, Cr.P.C., the alleged eyewitnesses stated that the victim was fired upon at his neck but during trial they improved their version and said that it was below the neck. The afore-referred reasons have not been found by this Court to be conjectural or arbitrary and against the weight of evidence on record. In the afore-referred circumstances, the acquittal of the respondents is unexceptionable.
Finding no merit in this petition, it is dismissed and .
Patition dismissed