MUMTAZ H.USSAIN SHAH vs The STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by Mumtaz Hussain Shah against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed his criminal appeal and upheld his conviction. The petitioner, a Sub-Engineer, was accused alongside a contractor of fabricating official records regarding repair work performed on 49 tube wells in the Mianwali Section. The trial court had convicted both individuals for offences under Section 218 and Section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, sentencing each to six months of rigorous imprisonment. While the High Court subsequently acquitted the co-accused contractor, it maintained the petitioner's conviction. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the conviction of the petitioner was sustainable given the evidence presented and the acquittal of his co-accused. Upon reviewing the impugned judgment and the arguments presented, the Supreme Court held that the petitioner's guilt was clearly established by the evidence. Consequently, the Court refused to grant leave to appeal, affirming that the case did not warrant interference with the High Court's decision.
- Does the acquittal of a co-accused automatically necessitate the acquittal of the remaining accused in a case of fabrication of records?
- Is the Supreme Court required to interfere with a High Court judgment if the guilt of the accused is clearly established by the record?
- Section 218, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--Mumtaz Hussain Shah petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 26-1-1985, dismissing his criminal appeal.
2. The petitioner who is a Sub-Engineer was accused of preparing false record about the repairs allegedly carried out by Muhammad Rafiq contractor,(his co-accused), in the nature of white- washing, painting and mud-plaster etc. Of 49 tube wells of Mianwali Section. He was, therefore, tried alongwith the abovesaid Muhammad Rafiq contractor for offences under section 218/109, P.P.C. They were sentenced to 6 months R.I. Each. Both of them filed an appeal before the High Court. The appeal of Muhammad Rafiq was accepted and he was acquitted, while the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed vide the impugned judgment.
3. Feeling aggrieved Mumtaz Hussain Shah has filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the impugned judgment.
We are of the view that the guilt has been squarely brought home to the petitioner and the case does not warrant any interference by this Court.
Leave is consequently refused.