NASEER AKHTAR vs THE STATE
The petitioner filed a jail petition challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which had been upheld by the Lahore High Court. The core legal question was whether the evidence, which had already been scrutinized and found sufficient to sustain the conviction of a co-accused in a connected petition, was equally reliable and sufficient to maintain the petitioner's conviction. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that the petitioner's conviction was based on the same evidentiary record as that of his co-accused, whose petition had previously been dismissed by the Court. Consequently, the Court held that there was no valid ground to deviate from the findings reached in the connected case. The petition was dismissed, affirming the principle that where co-accused are convicted based on identical evidence, and the conviction of one has been upheld by the appellate court, the conviction of the other, absent distinct exculpatory circumstances, remains sustainable.
- Can a conviction be sustained against a petitioner when the evidence relied upon is identical to that used against a co-accused whose conviction has already been upheld by the court?
- Is a jail petition liable to be dismissed if the arguments raised have already been adjudicated upon in a connected petition of a co-accused?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.--The petitioner in this jail petition was tried alongwith co-accused Faiz Ahmad and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, vide judgment, dated 13th January, 1982, under section 302/34, P.P.C. And was sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine etc. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, vide judgment dated 19th January, 1987, whereby the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court were maintained. The jail petition preferred by co-accused convict Faiz Ahmad (Criminal Jail Petition for Leave to Appeal No,18-R/1987) was considered by this Court and dismissed vide order, dated 27th June, 1987.
2. I have perused the petition submitted by the present petitioner and the judgment of the High Court.
3. I find that his conviction is based upon the same evidence which was found to be reliable and valid basis for the conviction recorded against the co-accused Faiz Ahmad in the connected jail petition. After having considered the case of the present petitioner in the light of the order passed in the connected jail petition I am of the opinion that there is no reason to reject the evidence produced by the prosecution against the present petitioner. For the same reasons as recorded in the order of the disposed of connected petition, I would dismiss this petition as well.'ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--I agree. 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.