Waris and another vs The State and others
This matter arises from a jail petition and criminal petitions seeking leave to appeal against concurrent findings of lower courts involving a murder conviction. The core legal question is whether the same set of judicial evidence, disbelieved by the courts below regarding acquitted co-accused, can be safely relied upon to sustain the capital conviction of the remaining petitioner without independent corroboration. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised merit consideration and granted leave to appeal to reappraise the entire evidence on record for the safe administration of justice. The key principle laid down is that evidence disbelieved for co-accused requires careful scrutiny and independent corroboration before being used to sustain the conviction of another accused on a capital charge.
- Can the same set of evidence disbelieved regarding acquitted co-accused be relied upon to convict the remaining petitioner on a capital charge without independent corroboration?
- Does a delay in the registration of the FIR warrant the grant of leave to appeal for reappraisal of evidence?
- When is leave to appeal granted by the Supreme Court for the reappraisal of evidence in a criminal matter?
ORDER
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Jail Petition No. 456 of 2015: Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is delay of about three hours in the registration of FIR that doctor (PW.5) stated in his cross-examination that death might have been caused twelve hours prior to the post-mortem examination, that it is the case of prosecution that along with the petitioner Waris, co-accused Zafar and Nasir alias Lachoo caused kasi blows on the head of deceased Noor Muhammad whereas co-accused Hakim alias Hako caused a blunt injury on the back of Noor Muhammad (deceased); that the doctor (PW.5) observed that injuries Nos.1, 2 and 3 individually and collectively were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature; that the learned trial court while disbelieving the evidence of complainant (PW.3) and Umer Hayat (PW.4) acquitted co-accused Zafar, Nasir alias.
Lachoo and Hakim alias Hako; that the appeal against acquittal of aforesaid co-accused was dismissed by the learned High Court through the impugned judgment that motive behind the occurrence was disbelieved by the learned High Court and kasi recovered on the pointation of petitioner, was not blood-stained. He vehemently contended that the same set of evidence which has been disbelieved by the learned courts below qua co-accused of the petitioner (since acquitted) cannot be relied to convict the petitioner on a capital charge particularly when there is no independent corroboration.
2. The contentions raised need consideration. Leave to appeal is therefore, granted in this case to reappraise entire evidence available on record for safe administration of justice.
Criminal Petitions Nos.121-L of 2017 and 1304-L of 2015: To be heard along with the appeal arising out of connected jail petition.
Cited by 3 cases
- Akbar Shah and 4 others vs The State 2024 YLR 1939
- RAZ MUHAMMAD Versus State 2023 PCrLJN 11
- Faheem alias Bara vs The State and another 2022 MLD 1298