MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Versus ZAFAR ABBAS
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had acquitted the respondents, Zafar Abbas and Muhammad Iqbal, of charges related to the murder of Salabat. The respondents had initially been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat, under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to death, with a fine imposed under Section 544-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petitioner sought to challenge the High Court's acquittal by requesting a re-appraisal of the evidence regarding the facts of the case. The Supreme Court, after hearing the arguments and reviewing the record, determined that the case did not warrant a re-appraisal of the evidence. Consequently, the Supreme Court held that the petition for leave to appeal was without merit and dismissed it, thereby upholding the acquittal granted by the High Court.
- Does the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal for the sole purpose of re-appraising evidence in a criminal case?
- Is a case fit for re-appraisal of evidence if the High Court has already acquitted the accused?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, 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 the Lahore High Court, dated 13-12-1982.
Zafar Abbas and Muhammad Iqbal were charged for the murder of Salabat on 14-3-1975 at Khuftanwela, the report of which was lodged after four days of the occurrence at 1-00 p.m. by Muhammad Hussain. After the completion of the investigation, both the respondents were put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat who, vide his Judgment, dated 25-9-1979, convicted the respondents under section 302/34, P.P.C: and sentenced both of them to death and a fine of Rs.3,000 each or in default to undergo one year's R.I. Fine, if recovered, was ordered to be paid to Mst Sardaran widow of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. The respondents took the matter in appeal in the High Court where they succeeded in obtaining their acquittal through the impugned judgment.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record at considerable length. All that the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks is the re-appraisal of the evidence on the question of fact. Having considered his arguments in the light of the evidence, we do not consider it a fit case for re-appraisal of the evidence. The petition is thus dismissed.
M. I. /M-278/S Petition dismissed.