Pakistan Case Law
1987 SCMR 1915

MUHAMMAD KHAN vs MUZAFFAR KHAN And 5 Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1987 SCMR 1915
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 16 and 22 of 1983 M.R. No.
Date1987-07-27
Judge(s)Shafiur Rahman, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byShafiur Rahman
ResultOrder accordingly
Summary

This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan through petitions for leave to appeal arising from a criminal case involving multiple accused persons. The core legal questions presented for the Court's consideration concern the sufficiency of evidence for conviction when some co-accused have been acquitted, the validity of rejecting corroborative evidence regarding the recovery of weapon empties and their forensic matching, and the application of the principle of common intention regarding the two convicts. In its order, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine these specific issues. However, the Court refused leave to appeal against the acquittal of three respondents—Yaqoob, Khalas, and Sattar—concluding that the testimony against them was provided by interested witnesses and lacked any independent corroborative evidence. Consequently, the Court maintained the status quo regarding the incarceration of one of the convicts, Hidayat, ordering that he shall not be released from prison pending the final hearing of the appeals. The judgment focuses on the threshold for appellate review in criminal convictions and the evidentiary requirements for establishing common intention and corroboration.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can evidence that resulted in the acquittal of three accused be sufficient for convicting two others without additional incriminating factors?
  • Was the corroborative evidence regarding the recovery of empties and their matching with weapons rejected on unsupportable grounds?
  • Does the evidence in the case establish a common intention among the two convicts?
leave to appealcriminal appealacquittalcorroborative evidencecommon intentioninterested witnessesrecovery of weapons

ORDER

SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.-- Subject to what is stated in para. 2 leave to appeal is granted in both the petitions to examine the following questions: -

(i) Whether the evidence which resulted in the acquittal of three accused by the trial Court could, without any other incriminating factor, be taken to be sufficient for convicting two others?

(ii) Whether the corroborative evidence of the recovery of the empties, and their matching with the recovered weapons has been not 'rejected on unsupportable grounds?

(iii) Whether it was not a case of common intention of the two convicts?

2. Leave to appeal is refused against the acquittal of Yaqoob, Khalas and Sattar respondents in Criminal Petition No.16 of 1983 for the witnesses being interested -no other corroborative evidence was forthcoming.

3. Hidayat shall not to be released from prison pending the hearing of these appeals.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.