MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR alias BADSHAH and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court, which upheld the convictions of the petitioners, Muhammad Jehangir and Muhammad Naveed, for murder and attempted murder, while acquitting two co-accused, Latif and Farooq, in the same incident. The core legal question is whether the conviction of the petitioners can be sustained when the testimony of the injured eyewitnesses was not believed in its totality and the co-accused were acquitted based on the same evidence. The petitioners contend that the acquittal of co-accused necessitates a deeper and more careful scrutiny of the evidence against the remaining accused. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to reappraise the evidence, noting that the trial court's reliance on the eyewitnesses was inconsistent given the acquittal of co-accused Latif and Farooq. The Court established that when co-accused are acquitted on the basis of the same evidence, the remaining convictions require rigorous judicial scrutiny to ensure the evidence against the appellants is independently corroborated and reliable.
- Does the acquittal of co-accused on the same evidence necessitate a deeper scrutiny of the evidence against the remaining convicted accused?
- Can a conviction be sustained when the testimony of injured eyewitnesses is not believed in its totality?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.---Both petitioners Muhammad Jehangir and Muhammad Naveed alongwith two others faced trial on charges under sections 302 and 307/34, P.P.C. In the trial Court and in the result Latif was sentenced to death and fine while the remaining three were sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine. Later High Court had heard murder reference alongwith joint appeal and allowed appeal of Latif and Farooq and dismissed appeal of the present petitioners. It is contended that on the basis of same evidence, when two co-accused are acquitted, evidence is to be subjected to very careful and deep scrutiny justifying conviction against others.
2. It is to be kept in view that version of two injured eye witnesses is not believed in totality and participation of Latif in the incident was doubted on the ground that marriage of his sister took place on the same day. Likewise Farooq, who is alleged to have raised Lalkara and fired shot in the air also have been acquitted for want of corroborative evidence against him.
3. We, therefore, grant leave to reappraise evidence in the light of contentions raised and mentioned above. Office objection is that petition is barred by 147 days. Leave is granted subject to limitation. It is stated that there is bail application as well. Issued notice to the Advocate-General, Punjab, for hearing of bail application. 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.