Dr. Capt. RIZWAN QADIR vs NAEEMULLAH HASHMI and another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which acquitted the respondent of a murder charge under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The High Court had overturned the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, primarily on the reasoning that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the complainant knew the accused prior to the incident, and that no presumption of prior acquaintance could be drawn. The petitioner contends that the High Court erred in its assessment, arguing that the identification parade was unnecessary because the incident occurred in broad daylight and the accused was clearly identified by the deceased's son. The Supreme Court, finding that the petitioner's contention regarding the identification of the accused requires further examination, granted leave to appeal. The Court also ordered the issuance of non-bailable warrants against the respondent to ensure his presence for the appellate proceedings.
- Does the failure of a complainant to explicitly state they did not know the accused previously create a presumption of prior acquaintance?
- Is an identification parade mandatory when an accused is allegedly identified by a witness in broad daylight?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' USMAN ALI SHAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioner against the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 23-6-1986, whereby criminal appeal of the respondent No,1 against his conviction under section 302, P.P.C. And sentence to life imprisonment with fine of Rs, 10,000 awarded to him by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Faisalabad for the murder of Abdul Qadir (deceased) was accepted and he was acquitted.
2. The High Court while acquitting the accused/respondent observed that there was nothing on the record to show that before the day of occurrence the complainant knew the accused by face. The contention that since the complainant did not state that the accused was not previously known to him, it should be presumed that he knew him by face, according to the High Court is devoid of force. As no such presumption arises under the circumstances of the present case that the accused/respondent was seen for the first time at the place of occurrence. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the identification parade was not called for as the occurrence took place in the broad daylight in which the accused was fully identified by the son of the deceased. The contention raised by the learned counsel needs further examination of this Court. Leave to appeal is therefore, granted for the said purpose.
3. ' Let non-bailable warrants be issued against the respondent Naeem Ullah Hashmi. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.