THE STATE vs MUHAMMAD KHAN
The State sought leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dismissing its criminal appeal in limine, which had upheld the acquittal of the respondent Muhammad Khan and others by the trial court for the murder of a police constable. The core legal question was whether the High Court and the trial court erred in acquitting the respondent by extending the benefit of the doubt where the identity of the accused was not established through an identification parade despite the occurrence taking place during complete darkness at 2:30 a.m., and where the prosecution's introduced source of light was not reflected in the site plan. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that neither lower court ignored any important piece of evidence or acted contrary to law in extending the benefit of the doubt to the accused. The key principle laid down is that an acquittal based on a proper appreciation of evidence regarding identity and benefit of the doubt will not be interfered with unless it involves a misreading of evidence or results in a grave miscarriage of justice.
- Whether an acquittal based on the failure to establish identity through an identification parade during nighttime warrants interference by the Supreme Court?
- Does the introduction of a light source not depicted in the site plan justify disbelieving eyewitness identification?
- When can the Supreme Court interfere with a concurrent finding of acquittal recorded by the courts below?
ORDER
' MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J.---The State, through this petition seeks leave to appeal, against judgment dated 24-1-1993, passed by a Division Bench of Lahore High Court (Multan Bench) whereby Criminal Appeal No, 267/92 was dismissed in limine.
2. Muhammad Khan, respondent and five others accused were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan, for the murder of Ghulam Raza, Constable, but vide judgment dated 26-5- 1992, all of them were acquitted.
3. The State, challenged in appeal the judgment of acquittal qua, Muhammad Khan respondent, only in the Lahore High Court which was dismissed as aforementioned. Hence this petition.
4. According to prosecution, a police party of which Ghulam Raza, Constable (deceased) was member raised the house of Muhammad Khan who was accused in a theft case, on 12-6-1991, at 2- 30 a.m. Muhammad Khan came out of the house and fired from his .12 bore gun which hit Ghulam Raza Constable on his chest and he died on the spot.
5. The learned trial Judge, acquitted the respondent and other accused, mainly, on the ground that their identity was not proved. Admittedly the accused were arrested on 27-6-1991, but no identification parade was held to establish their identity as the occurrence had taken place at 2-30 a.m. When there was complete darkness.
6. The learned Judges of the High Court disbelieved the introduction of lantern, by the prosecution as it was not shown to exist in the site plan.
7. We have heard learned counsel for petitioner and gone through the file with his assistance.
Learned counsel has not been able to show that the learned trial Judge or for that matter even, the learned Judges of the High Court, ignored any important piece of evidence or acted contrary to law, in acquitting the respondent by extending benefit of doubt in his favour, which according to him has resulted in miscarriage of justice. This petition is dismissed and .