Mst. RUKHSANA Versus REHMANULLAH
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal assailing the judgment of the High Court dated 4.6.2015, which overturned the conviction and death sentence awarded to the respondent by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mardan, vide judgment dated 13.12.2013 under section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 for the double murder of Muhammad Islam and Muhammad Said Ghani Shah. The core legal question involves the proper appreciation of ocular and investigative evidence in a criminal trial and whether the High Court erred in acquitting the respondent based on peripheral omissions and minor discrepancies. The Supreme Court held that the contentions merited consideration, noting that the High Court's reliance on inconsequential omissions and site plan entries without proper confrontation presented adjudication incompatible with settled norms of criminal justice, resulting in potential miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to reappraise the entire evidence and directed the issuance of bailable warrants for the respondent.
- Whether the High Court's reliance on peripheral omissions and inconsequential discrepancies warrants interference by the Supreme Court in a criminal appeal?
- Does the ocular account and investigative conclusion in the present case constitute proof beyond reasonable doubt for the conviction of the accused?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted to reappraise the entire evidence when the acquittal judgment is alleged to be artificial and resulting in a miscarriage of justice?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Muhammad Islam, 30/32 and Muhammad Said Ghani Shah, 25/26, were shot dead at 4:30 p.m. on 2.2.2011 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 inconsequential omissions by the Investigating Officer, witnesses' inability to point out caliber of weapons with exactitude and reference to 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 Officer shall execute the warrant within a fortnight.
2. MWA/R-6/SC Leave granted.