MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Versus RUKAN DIN
This petition for leave to appeal challenges the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 4-7-1982, whereby the respondents, who were previously convicted by the trial court for murder, murderous assault, and other allied offences under the Pakistan Penal Code, were acquitted. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court committed any legal or factual error in its appreciation of evidence warranting interference by the apex court. The Supreme Court held that the High Court evaluated the evidence on sound principles for the appraisal of criminal evidence and that the findings did not require any interference. The petition was accordingly dismissed. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with an order of acquittal passed by the High Court when the evidence has been appraised on sound legal principles.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with an order of acquittal passed by the High Court when evidence has been evaluated on sound principles?
- Does the appraisal of evidence by the High Court in criminal cases warrant interference if conducted on sound principles?
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 323, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.- -This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, dated 4-7-1982.
2. Rukan Din and eight others, residents of Chak No.150 G.B. Police Station Rajana, District Faisalabad, were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad for the murder of Abdul Ghafoor and his brother Muhammad Ismail and for murderous assault on Muhammad Iqbal, Mst. Niamat Bibi, Mst. Salamat Bibi and Mst. Hajran. The occurrence was alleged to have taken place on 15-1-1977 at 8.00 in the morning in the house of the complainant. The learned trial Court, after recording the prosecution's evidence and the statements of respondents under section 342 Cr.P.C., convicted Rukan Din, Sardar Muhammad, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Saleem, Muhammad Hussain, Shera and Muhammad Jamil, respondents, under section 302/149, P.P.C. on two counts and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment each and to a fine of Rs.10,000 each and in default to three years' R.I. each on each count. Muhammad Ashraf and Bahadur, respondents, were also convicted under section 302/149 PPC on two counts and sentenced to life imprisonment a fine of Rs.10,000 and in default to three years' R.I. on each count. Muhammad Ashraf respondent was further convicted under section 302/149 PPC for the murder of Abdul Ghafoor and sentenced to death and a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default to three years' R.I. Bahadur Ali respondent was convicted under section 302/149 PPC for causing the death of Muhammad Tufail and sentenced to death, to a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default to three years' R.I. Rukan Din, Sardar Muhammad, Bahadur Ali, Muhammad Saleem, Shera, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Jamil and Muhammad Ashraf, respondents, were also convicted under section 148 PPC through the same judgment dated 15-12-1979 and sentenced to two years' R.I. each. They were further convicted under section 452, P.P.C. and sentenced to three years' R.I. each, a fine of Rs.2,000 each or in default to one year's further R.I. each. They were also convicted under section 323/149, P.P.C. on two counts and sentenced to suffer six months' R.I. each on two counts. They were also convicted under section 324/149, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer six months' R.I. each. The substantive sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently. It was further ordered that half of the amount of fine when realized be paid as compensation to the legal heirs of the two deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C.
3. All the respondents went in appeal to the High Court where they were successful in securing a favourable order of 4-7-1982, hence the present petition against their acquittal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the judgment of the Court below and the record of evidence and are of the view that the learned Judges of the High Court have evaluated the evidence on sound principles for the appraisal of evidence in criminal cases and thus their finding does not require any interference by us.
5. Finding no force in the petition, the same is dismissed.
M.I. /M-239/S ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.