ASHAQ vs The STATE
This criminal petition for leave to appeal arose from the conviction of the petitioner for causing injuries to a complainant. The petitioner was initially convicted under Section 307/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, but the appellate court reduced the conviction to Section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 while maintaining the sentence. The petitioner challenged his conviction before the High Court, arguing that because six co-accused were acquitted on the basis that the eye-witnesses were not supported by medical evidence, the petitioner should also be acquitted as the witnesses were unreliable. The Supreme Court examined the record and rejected this contention. The Court held that the acquittal of the co-accused by the appellate court was not justified, and therefore, the petitioner could not rely on that acquittal to invalidate his own conviction. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit, affirming that the acquittal of co-accused does not automatically entitle a petitioner to acquittal where the underlying reasoning for the co-accused's acquittal is itself flawed.
- Does the acquittal of co-accused on the ground of unreliable eye-witness testimony automatically entitle a remaining accused to acquittal?
- Can an appellate court's unjustified acquittal of co-accused be used as a ground for the acquittal of the remaining accused?
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 325, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Probation of Offenders Order 1960
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-Ashaq petitioner was tried aloagwith six' others for offence under section 307/149, P. P. C. For causing injuries and making murderous assault on Jan Muhammad, P. W. The learned trial Magistrate convicted the petitioner and four others and sentenced each of them to 4 years' R.1. And a fine of Rs. 1,000 (one year R. 1;. Each in case of default). He discharged the remaining two co-accused under the Probation of Offenders Order, 1960. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, acquitted six accused but dismissed the appeal of Ashaq petitioner.He, however, reduced his conviction from 307, P. P. C: to that under section 325, P. P. C. And maintained his sentence. He then filed a criminal revision before -the High Court, which too, was dismissed vide the impugned order.
Hence the present petition:
2. We have gone through the relevant portions of the impugned order of the learned Courts below and beard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The only contention urgedby him was that since the six co-accused were acquitted on the ground that the statements of the eye-witnesses were not supported by the medical evidence, it is apparent that the said witnesses are not trustworthy and as such the petitioner should also be acquitted: We are afraid, we are not persuaded to agree with this contention because on going through the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore; w feel that the acquittal of the six co-accused by him was not justified. 'This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed as being without any merit; S. Q.