Mst. BAKHAT KHATOON vs AWWAL JANG and others
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had set aside the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court, resulting in the acquittal of the respondents. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court's appellate judgment, which acquitted the respondents due to a lack of corroborative evidence and the inconsequential nature of alleged recoveries, was legally justified or resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, finding that the appellate court had properly scanned the entire evidence and correctly determined that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses lacked necessary corroboration and that the recoveries were not connected to the crime. The Court held that the High Court's judgment aligned with the established principles governing the safe administration of criminal justice. Consequently, finding no grounds for interference, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming that an acquittal based on a proper evaluation of evidence and lack of corroboration is legally sound.
- Does the lack of corroborative evidence for prosecution witnesses justify the acquittal of the accused?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with an appellate judgment that has properly evaluated the evidence on record?
- Are recoveries that are not connected to the crime sufficient to sustain a conviction?
ORDER
1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated the 7th March, 1987. The High Court on appeal by the respondents declined to uphold the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court and acquitted them.
2. ' Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition submitted that the judgment of the High Court resulted in miscarriage of justice. The acquittal of the respondents was not justified in law.
3. The submission has no force because the High Court after scanning through the entire evidence observed that "in the present case, the testimonies of Mst. Bakht Khatun and Muhammad Nawaz Khan have not been corroborated by any such evidence. The recoveries, as already held, in this case are of no consequence and they are in no manner connected with the crime."
4. ' The judgment of the High Court being in accord with law and the principles governing the safe administration of criminal justice calls for no interference. Dismissed.