Mst. Rukhsana vs Rehmanullah and another
This matter involves a criminal appeal against a High Court judgment that overturned the conviction and death sentence of the respondent for the double murder of two individuals. The incident occurred in broad daylight following a dispute over fodder. The petitioner challenges the High Court's acquittal, arguing that the ocular account and investigative findings were consistent and established guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The petitioner contends that the High Court erred by placing disproportionate reliance on peripheral issues, such as minor omissions by the investigating officer and the witnesses' inability to specify weapon calibers, rather than focusing on the substantive evidence. The core legal question is whether the High Court's appreciation of evidence was legally sound or if it resulted in a miscarriage of justice by ignoring the established norms of criminal evidence. The Supreme Court found that the contentions merited consideration, granted leave to appeal to reappraise the entire evidence, and issued bailable warrants for the respondent's appearance.
- Does the High Court's reliance on minor investigative omissions and witness inconsistencies regarding weapon caliber constitute a valid ground for overturning a conviction based on ocular evidence?
- What are the parameters for the Supreme Court to grant leave to appeal against an acquittal judgment in a murder case?
- Does the failure to confront witnesses with site plan entries render their testimony unreliable in a criminal trial?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Muhammad Islam, 30/32 and Muham mad Said Ghani Shah, 25/26, were shot dead at 4:30 p.m. on 2.2.201 1 in the backdrop of a previous brawl within the precincts of Police Station Rustam, District Mardan; incident was reported by Muhammad Inaam PW 5:30 p.m. straight at the police station; respondent along with his brother Abid were arrayed as accused in the backdrop of a previous dispute over the fodder; latter is still away from law; a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Mardan convicted the respondent under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to death on two counts with a direction to pay compensation vide judgment dated 13.12.2013, overturned by the High Court vide impugned judgment dated 4.6.2015, vires whereof, are being assailed on a variety of grounds. It is argued that the deceased, both in their prime youth, were brutally done to death in broad daylight under unmistakable premeditation within the view of witnesses who not only established their presence at the scene but also had no axe to grind against the culprits, one of whom is still avoiding justice; that each piece of evidence produced by the prosecution is synchronized with the events within the proximity of time and space, hardly leaving a room to deliberate a false case or entertain any hypothesis of substitution. The bottom line is that ocular account and investigative conclusions squarely constituted "proof beyond doubt" and, thus, High Court's disproportionate reliance on the peripheral issues purporting inconsequen tial omissions by the Investigating Officer, witnesses' inability to point out caliber of weapons with exactitude and reference to A entries in the site plan without their having been confronted to the witnesses presents adjudication, diametrically incompatible with the settled norms of appreciation of evidence in administration of criminal justice and, thus, being artificial tends to result in miscarriage of justice, clamouring for intervention by this Court. Contentions merit consideration; leave is granted to reappraise the entire evidence. Send for the respondent through bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.200,000/-, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at Peshawar . Station House Of ficer shall execute the warrant within a fortnight.