Pakistan Case LawKHALIL AHMED and anothers Versus THE STATE and another
This matter involves two petitions for leave to appeal filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The first petition, filed by the complainant, challenged the acquittal of a respondent, while the second petition, filed by two convicts, challenged their conviction under Section 302/34 and Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, as maintained by the Lahore High Court. The core legal questions concerned whether the delay in filing the complainant's petition was excusable and whether the conviction of the petitioners was supported by reliable evidence. Regarding the complainant's petition, the Court held that the 23-day delay was not satisfactorily explained and refused leave to appeal. Regarding the convicts' petition, the Court observed that the complainant's testimony was contradicted by documentary evidence regarding the deceased's previous criminal involvement and enmities. Additionally, the Court noted discrepancies between medical evidence and ocular testimony, alongside issues regarding the recovery of empties. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to the convicts to allow for a full reappraisal of the evidence to ensure the proper administration of criminal justice.
- Whether a delay in filing a petition for leave to appeal that lacks a satisfactory explanation warrants the refusal of leave?
- Does a contradiction between ocular evidence and medical evidence necessitate a reappraisal of the entire evidence in a criminal case?
- Can the denial of facts by a complainant on oath, when contradicted by documentary evidence, constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal against a conviction?
ORDER
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The two convicts and the complainant by two separate petitions seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 13-4-1993, whereby the conviction of petitioners in Cr.P.LA. No, 231-L of 1993 (Khalil Ahmed and Muhammad Yasin) under section 302/34, P.P.C. And of Khalil Ahmed (petitioner No, 1 in Cr.P.LA. No, 231-L/93) under section 411, P.P.C. Was maintained while Muhammad Hussain (respondent No, 1 in Cr.P.L.A, No, 325-L of 1993) was acquitted.
2.As the petition filed by the complainant Muhammad Ibrahim (Cr.P.L.A. No, 325-L of 1993) against the acquittal of Muhammad Hussain is shown to be barred by 23 days for which the explanation furnished is not satisfactory, leave to appeal is refused in the same.
3.As regards the petition for leave to appeal filed by the convicts (Cr.P.LA. No, 231-L of 1993), we find that the main eye-witness and the complainant in the case namely, Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.1) has on oath denied certain facts which are prima facie established by documents filed in defence with regard to the previous implication of the deceased Muhammad Amin alias Munshi in various cases and the enmities. Besides, the medical evidence is not in conformity with the ocular evidence and the recoveries of seven empties from the spot. These factors necessitate a reappraisal of the entire evidence with a view to ensure the same administration of criminal justice. Hence, leave to appeal is granted to the convicts-petitioners in Cr.P.L.A. No, 231-L of 1993.
Judges on this bench
- Nasim Hasan Shah3,148 judgments
- Shafiur Rahman2,457 judgments
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments