Muhammad Shafi alias Kuddoo vs The State, etc
This criminal appeal arose from the High Court's reversal of an acquittal order passed by the trial court regarding a murder charge under Section 302(b) PPC. The appellant, along with co-accused, was initially acquitted of the murder of Khalil Ahmed due to inordinate delay in reporting, contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, and the doubtful presence of inimical witnesses. The High Court subsequently convicted the appellant while maintaining the acquittal of co-accused with identical roles. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court's reversal of acquittal adhered to established judicial principles. The Court held that an acquittal carries a double presumption of innocence and can only be set aside if the trial court's judgment is blatantly perverse or impossible. Finding that the trial court's view was a possible one based on the evidence, and noting that the prosecution's case lacked certainty, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the acquittal, emphasizing that acquittal cannot be reversed merely because a contrary view is possible.
- Section 302 of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
- Section 382-B of Code of Criminal Procedure
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Muhammad Shafi alias Kuddoo, appellant herein, was tried along side Abdul Razzaq and Sakina Bibi, co-accused for committing qatl-e-amd of Khalil Ahmed at fajarwela on 15.2.2002 within the remit of Police Station Chunian, District Kasur . According to the complainant, on the fateful day, after offering fajar prayer , he was on way back home with Khalil Ahmed deceased a head of witness es; as the deceased went past house of Sakina Bibi accused he was intercepted by the appellant as well as Abdul Razzaq. Upon exhortation, the appellant and Abdul Razzaq co-acc used gave sota blows to the deceased; motive for crime is cited as alienation of immovable property by the deceased in favour of Sakina Bibi co-accused, his second wife as well as the appellant, a transaction that he attempted to revoke in the wake of dif ferences with his better half.
2. The accused were indicted before the Additional Sessions Judge, who proceeded to acquit them vide judgment dated 30.10.2002 vires whereof were challenged through appeal admitted to the extent of present appellant and finally allowed vide impugned judgment dated 15.2.2016 whereby the appellant stand convicted under clause (b) of Section 302 of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860; sentenced to imprisonment for life, he is directed to pay compensation in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- or to undergo six months S.I. with benefit of Section 382-B of Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that there was no occasion for the learned High Court to reverse the appellant' s acquittal that too after disse cting his case from identically placed co-accused, extended benefit of doubt. It is next argued that view taken by the learned trial Court being a possible view compatible with the evidence brought on the record was not open to any legitimate exception; the bottom line is that the impugned reasoning formulated by the learned High Court to convert appellant' s acquittal into conviction being in conflict with settled norms of safe administration of criminal justice and judicial principles applicable to reversal of acquittal warrants interference by this Court.
4. A variety of reasons weighed with the learned trial Judge to acquit the accused from the charge; inordinate delay in recourse to law being foremost, these include improbability of witnesses' presence; their enmity with the accused, as well as, contradictions in their depositions and thus he found it unsafe to return a guilty verdict. None of the reasons cited by the learned trial Judge has been found by us as artificial or unrealistic. Even otherwise on an independent analysis, genesis of prosecution case does not appear to be free from doubt. Deceased was 70 years of age and in a chilled winter morning his presence at the crime scene within the view of witnesses, admittedly inimical towards the accused, available per chance and with formidable past has rightly been viewed with caution by the learned trial Judge. Ocular account is in conflict with medical evidence inasmuch as according to the crime report both the appellant, as well as, Abdul Razzaq, co-accused, are assigned one blow each to the deceased, whereas according to the initial medical examination, Medical Officer noted solitary injury on the head, its impact on the eye has been utilized by the witnesses to array the latter in the crime. Deputation of Sakina Bibi to monitor deceased' s arrival so as to inform her son about deceased' s arrival is also an aspect of the case that requires a pinch of salt. Certainly there was no occasion for the learned High Court to convert appellant' s acquittal into conviction after it had itself disbelieved prosecution evidence qua two out of three accused, one with an identical role.
It is by now well settled that acquittal carries with it double presumption of innocence; it is reversed only when found blatantly perverse, resting upon fringes of impossibility and resulting into miscarriage of justice. It cannot be set aside merely on the possibility of a contra view. The High Court has derogate d from settled principles of law and thus departure does not commend itself with approval. Resultantly , Crimina l appeal is allowed, impugned judgment dated 15.2.2016 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted from the charge and shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. Above are the reasons of our short order of even date which is reproduced as under: "For detailed reasons to follow , the instant criminal appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the appellant Muhammad Shafi alias Kuddoo are set aside. He is acquitted of the charge framed against him. He shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other criminal case."
Cited by 53 cases
- Muhammad Usman Versus State 2026 YLR 1753
- Muhammad Azam Versus State 2025 YLR 2312
- Muhammad Adnan alias Chanda Versus State 2025 YLR 2049
- State Versus Gul Zarin 2026 MLD 824
- State Versus Aftab Khan 2026 YLR 1345
- Ghulam Qadir Versus State 2025 YLR 1911
- ZUNAIR YOUNAS Versus State 2026 PLD 222
- The State, Abdul Rasheed vs Abdul Rasheed, The State 2025 LHC 1844
- Chetan vs The State 2025 SCP 89, 2025 SCMR 944
- Sultan alias Panun Versus State 2026 YLR 1580
- CHETAN Versus State 2025 SCMR 944
- Fida Hussain and another vs The State and another 2025 LHC 656
- Engro Fertilizer Limited vs Ful Bench of NIRC & others 2025 SHC 266
- Aamir Khan and others vs The State etc 2024 LHC 2388, 2024 YLR 2272, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 996
- Amir Shahzad, Muhammad Iqbal vs The State, etc, The State, etc 2024 LHC 390, 2024 YLR 2418, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 1159
- Shaffat Ibrahim Khan vs Chairman National Accountability Bureau and others 2023 LHC 6990, 2024 PCRLJ 539
- Abu Bakar alias Samosa, etc, Master Ansar, Shazia Siddique vs The State 2023 LHC 6759, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 720, 2024 YLR 1510
- Abid Ali and another, Muhammad Nazir, Muhammad Nazir, The State vs The State and another, Abid Ali 2023 LHC 6634, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 745, 2024 PCRLJ 1252
- Moula Bakhsh Versus State 2025 YLR 1467
- Teeko alias Tikam son of Gayan Bheel vs The State 2023 SHC 457
- Qadir Bakhsh alias Dau vs The State 2024 PCRLJ 982
- WaliUllah vs Muhammad Nauman Munawar, etc 2023 IHC 400
- Muhammad Ishaq and 4 others vs State and another PLJ 2023 Cr.C. 978
- Muhammad Ishaq and four others vs The State and another 2023 LHC 1725
- The State, Mahnaz Ali vs Mahnaz Ali, The State and another 2023 LHC 1641
- National Accountability Bureau vs Shahid Hussain 2022 SHC 476
- The State (NAB) vs Begum Slam Ahmed 2022 SHC 382
- Anwar and another vs The State 2023 YLR 2185
- The State vs Javaid 2022 LHC 5253
- Qasim Siddique Zia vs M. Sabir Bhatti etc 2022 IHC 166
- The State vs Abdul Khaliq 2022 LHC 5037
- Muhammad Siraj vs The State and another 2022 LHC 4961
- The State vs Mushtaq Ahmad 2022 LHC 5608, 2022 KLR Criminal Cases 406
- Dad Gul alias Mangha and another vs The State 2023 YLR 1702
- Muhammad Ajmal vs State another PLJ 2023 Cr.C. 113
- Muhammad Abid vs State etc PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 1495
- Muhammad Naeem vs State PLJ 2023 Cr.C. 50
- Abdul Wahid Alias Budho vs State PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 1273
- RIASAT ALI Versus State 2023 MLD 629
- Nasir Hussain and others vs State and anothers PLJ 2021 Cr.C. 1057
- Soomar alias Liaquat Ali son of Gulab vs Raza Muhammad son of Shah Bux 2021 SHC 164
- Allah Bakhsh vs Muhammad Ramzan and 2 others 2021 MLD 987
- RAFAQAT ALI alias PHAKOO Versus State 2021 PCrLJ 360
- Wazir Muhammad vs Abdul Jabir ctc 2021 YLR 2294, 2020 PHC 498
- Ali Ahmed and others vs The State 2022 PCRLJ 1480
- SADAM HUSSAIN alias KOBRA Versus State 2021 MLD 1763
- Muhammad Rashid and another vs The State 2022 YLR 119
- The State and others vs Kashif Nouman alias Kashi and others 2023 LHC 7390, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 638
- The State and others vs Moula Bakhsh and others 2023 LHC 7348
- The State, Khuda Bakhsh and another, The State vs Khuda Bakhsh, The State and another, Muhammad Zafar Iqbal 2023 LHC 2002, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 201
…and 3 more citing cases