FA ROOQ A HMA D vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, examining the sustainability of a conviction where material features of the evidence were overlooked by the courts below. The core legal question concerns the proper appreciation of evidence in a criminal trial, specifically regarding the emergence of the accused from a specific location prior to the assault, the acquittal of co-accused affecting witness credibility, the medical evidence regarding the empty stomach of the deceased, and unexplained injuries. The Court held that these significant discrepancies and unconsidered features in the evidence require a comprehensive reappraisal for the safe dispensation of justice. The key principle laid down is that overlooking material evidentiary contradictions and medical evidence inconsistencies warrants a thorough reassessment of the prosecution's case to prevent a miscarriage of justice.
- Does the acquittal of co-accused persons affect the overall credibility of prosecution witnesses requiring reappraisal?
- Whether contradictions between ocular testimony and medical evidence regarding the condition of the deceased's stomach warrant a re-examination of the case?
- Is it necessary for courts to consider unexplained injuries on the person of the deceased when evaluating the manner of the assault?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J.-- Upon examining the record and the judgment of the High Court, we find that the Courts below have not acted on an important feature in the evidence such as the emergence of the petitioner and his accomplices, namely Amir Aslam and Fayyaz Ahmad from the Baithak of Faiz Muhammad before launching an assault on Muhammad Sardar, deceased. The finding of the High Court in this regard is that the parties met "per chance" and the petitioner, who was feeling insulted on account of a suspected liaison of the deceased with his sister, all of a sudden attacked the deceased with a knife and effected his escape.
2. ' Again the role assigned to his accomplices was disbelieved by the High Court, and they were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted. Apparently this is also a feature which requires consideration as their implication with reference to definite roles affects the credibility of the witnesses. The incident allegedly occurred at about 5-30 p.m. But, surprisingly enough, the stomach of the deceased was found empty which is also an exceptional feature for if it was to be accepted that the mid-day meal was taken at about noon-time then in that case there would be some digested meal in the stomach of the deceased.
3. ' Lastly, there is one other injury on the person of the deceased caused by a blunt weapon which was not considered by the Courts below, in the context of the allegation that the petitioner had only caused a knife blow and that too all of a sudden, leaving no room for any altercation. This factor again shows that this injury was caused either with a fist blow or with a blunt-weapon which has not been explained by the prosecution witnesses and coupled with it is the nature of the injury on the neck of the deceased, which could not have been caused in the manner suggested.
4. ' All these features in the evidence require it to be reappraised for safe dispensation of justice.