MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioner's criminal revision against his conviction and sentence as affirmed by the appellate court. The core legal question involved the sustainability of concurrent findings of conviction recorded by the trial court and upheld by the appellate and high court based on consistent testimony of injured witnesses supported by medical evidence. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact regarding the petitioner's guilt were based on a proper appreciation of evidence and that no legal infirmity or illegality was pointed out to warrant interference. The key principle laid down is that this Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in criminal matters where the testimony of injured witnesses is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence and no jurisdictional defect or misreading of evidence is shown.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of conviction affirmed by the High Court when based on consistent testimony of injured witnesses?
- Does medical evidence corroborating the ocular account sustain a conviction under the Pakistan Penal Code?
- Whether a petition for leave to appeal is maintainable without pointing out any illegality or legal infirmity in the impugned judgments?
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J .---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 8-5-2002, whereby Criminal Revision No.389 of 2002 filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the Appellate Court was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore.
2. The facts briefly narrated for the disposal of this petition are that F.I.R. No.313 of 1999 was got recorded on 18-9-1999 at Police Station Sadar, Muridke, District Sheikhupura, at the instance of Muhammad Ali, son of the present petitioner, under sections 337-A(i)/337--F(i)/337-F(ii)/337-L(2)/34, P.P.C. against Sabir Ali (P.W.1) and his brother Arshad Mehmood (P.W.2), injured witnesses of the cross-version. During the course of investigation, cross-version of Sabir Ali was found plausible and a report under section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted against the petitioner and his two brothers.
3. During the course of trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozewala, Sabir Ali (P.W.1) complainant, gave an application to summon the father of the petitioner alongwith his third brother. Said application was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate qua father of the petitioner whereas charge was also framed against third brother of the petitioner. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, after thrashing the entire evidence brought on record by the parties through his judgment dated 14-3-2002, convicted the petitioner and acquitted his three brothers.
4. An appeal was filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence whereas Sabir Ali, complainant, filed a criminal appeal as well as a criminal revision. In the former, he-took exception to the acquittal of three brothers of the petitioner while in the, latter, he prayed for enhancement of sentence of the petitioner. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala, through his judgment dated 4-4-2002 dismissed both the above appeals as well as criminal revision.
5. The afore-said judgment of the Appellate Court was assailed by the petitioner before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge through his judgment dated 8-5-2002, impugned herein. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
6. We have considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel and have perused the entire material available on record with his assistance. The occurrence in this case has been narrated in its material particulars by Sabir Ali (P.W.1) and Arshad Mehmood (P.W.2), both injured witnesses. They were consistent in their testimony and the same found full support from the medical evidence. It is pertinent to mention over here that after the submission of challan against the petitioner and his brothers by the prosecution finding the cross-version to be true, a complaint was filed. The learned trial Court proceeded with both the cases simultaneously. After thrashing the evidence brought on record the private complaint filed by the petitioner resulted in the acquittal of other side and no appeal was preferred against the same by the petitioner/complainant. The learned First Appellate Court on an appeal filed by the petitioner again evaluated the entire evidence and maintained the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial Magistrate, which determination has been upheld by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court. Learned counsel has failed to point out any illegality or legal infirmity in the impugned judgments of the Courts below warranting interference by this Court.
7. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition teeing without any substance is hereby dismissed and leave refused.
8. N.H.Q./M-734/S Leave refused.