NIGAH HUSSAIN SHAH and 4 others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had reversed a trial Magistrate's acquittal order and convicted the petitioners for offenses under the Pakistan Penal Code. The petitioners were originally charged with murderous assault under sections 307, 148, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The High Court, in an acquittal appeal, found the prosecution had successfully proven the guilt of the respondents (petitioners herein), set aside the acquittal, and imposed substantial sentences of imprisonment and fines. The petitioners subsequently sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court's reversal of the acquittal and subsequent conviction of the petitioners was legally warranted based on the evidence presented. The Supreme Court, upon hearing arguments, granted leave to appeal to conduct a reappraisal of the evidence to determine if the conviction in the acquittal appeal was justified. The principle established is that the Supreme Court will grant leave to appeal to re-examine evidence when a High Court reverses an acquittal and imposes a conviction.
- Can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal to reappraise evidence in a case where the High Court has reversed an acquittal and entered a conviction?
- Is it appropriate for the Supreme Court to examine whether a conviction was warranted in an acquittal appeal?
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 11-5-1993 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Criminal Acquittal Appeal No,981 of 1991 filed by the State against the. Acquittal order dated 9-9-1991 recorded by the learned Magistrate, acquitting, inter alia the present petitioners who were charged under section 307/148/149/109, P.P.C. For having committed murderous assault upon Aftab Ahmad P.W.1, a practicing Advocate and one Muhammad Zaman, allowing the same in the following terms:-- "Upshot of the above discussion is that the prosecution has brought guilt home to respondents Nos.1 to 7 but the trial Magistrate fell into grave error by acquitting them of the charge causing failure of justice. I, therefore, hold respondents Nigah Hussain, (2) Mehmood Ahmad, (3) Nisar Ahmad, (4) Firdausi, (5) Javed Akmal, (6) Nazar Hussain and (7) Ghazanfar Ali guilty of the offences under section 148/149/307, P.P.C. Thus, on the charge under section 148, P.P.C. Each of the respondents, named above, shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of one years On the charge under section 307, P.P.C., I hold that it was a sensational, brutal and desperate attack as a result whereof Aftab Ahmad P.W.1 lost his leg, and thus, there are no mitigating circumstances in this case. In this view of the matter, respondents Nigah Hussain Shah and Mehmood Ahmad do not deserve any leniency, therefore, both of them are convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each, and to pay the fine amounting to Rs,50,000 (fifty thousand each) or in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. As far as remaining five respondents co-accused Nisar Ahmad, Firdous, Javed Aktnal, Nazar Hussain Shah and Ghazanfar Ali are concerned, each of them is further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under section 307/149, They are further directed to pay fine of Rupees twenty-five thousand (Rs,25,000) each or in default thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. Out of the amount of fine, if recovered, Rupees one hundred thousand (Rs,1,00,000) shall be paid to Aftab Ahmad P.W.1 the injured victim. Similarly, an amount of Rupees twenty-five thousand (Rs,25,000) shall also be paid to the other injured P.W. Namely Muhammad Zaman as compensation. Sentences shall run concurrently. Respondents convicts shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out their respective sentences."
' The above petitioners who are five in number have filed present petition for leave to appeal.
2. We have heard the arguments of Mr. Munir Ahmad, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioners and Qazi M. Saleem, and learned Advocate Supreme Court for the complainant party/caveat or. we feel that since the petitioners have been convicted by the High Court, they may be granted leave so that this Court may reappraise the evidence and ascertain, whether the conviction of the petitioners was warranted in an acquittal appeal.
' Leave is accordingly granted.