MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs The STATE
This petition for special leave to appeal arises from the judgment of the West Pakistan High Court, Lahore, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal and upheld his conviction and death sentence under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code for the murder of an 8/9-year-old girl, Mst. Sabri, though he was acquitted of the rape charge under Section 376. The core legal question concerned whether the concurrent findings of fact regarding the petitioner's apprehension at the scene and his involvement in the murder warranted interference by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the conviction was based on a proper appreciation of reliable eyewitness testimony, a confessional statement, and corroborating medical evidence, finding no grounds to interfere with the lower courts' findings. The key principle laid down is that where prosecution witnesses have no motive to falsely implicate an accused and their testimony is supported by independent evidence, direct apprehension at the crime scene, and medical reports, concurrent findings of guilt will not be disturbed.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts when the conviction is based on reliable eyewitness testimony and medical evidence?
- Does apprehension of the accused at the spot by eyewitnesses serve as strong corroboration of guilt in a murder charge?
- Whether the absence of motive for prosecution witnesses to falsely implicate the accused sustains a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code?
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD J.--Petitioner Muhammad Iqbal was tried under sections 376 and 302, P. P. C.
2. By the learned Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan, for committing rape upon Mst. Sabri, a girl aged 8/9 years and thereafter for murder by strangulating her with her dopatta m at uninhabited dera of Zulfiqar Khan. The learned Sessions Judge, by judgment dated the 25th July 1968, acquitted the petitioner of the charge under section 376 but convicted him under section 302, P. P. C. And sentenced him to death. The petitioner's appeal, namely, Criminal Appeal No. 787 of 1968 (Murder Reference No. 242 of 1968) was dismissed by judgment dated the 12th February 1970, by a Division Bench of the West Pakistan High Court, Lahore. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said judgment.
3. The prosecution case is that on the morning of 12th April 1967, P. W. Faqir Bakhsh sent his daughter Mst: Sabri deceased to bring curry for him from the bazar. As she did not turn up, Faqir Bakhsh went out in search for her. He was met by Noor Din and Ali Ahmad P. Ws. In the street. He asked them to help him in searching his daughter. They joined him. On teaching near an uninhabited dera of Zulfiqar Khan, they heard screams coming out from the dera. The door of the dera was pushed but as it was chained from inside the witnesses scaled over the wall and found the petitioner sitting on the chest of Mst. Sabri deceased. She was lying dead and a dopatta was found around her neck.
4. The petitioner, on seeing them, tried to escape but was apprehended on the spot. Faqir Bakhsh P.
5. W. Recovered on a search, two ear rings, Exh. P. 1-2, nose ring, Exh. P. 3 and a pair of bungles, Exh. P.
6. 4, of the deceased from the pocket of the shirt of-the petitioner.
7. The conviction of the petitioner is based on the testimony of P. W. 9 Faqir Bakhsh, father of the deceased and P. Ws. Noor Din and Ali Ahmad. It is also based on the confessional statement-of the petitioner.
8. Even otherwise there is reliable independent evidence against the petitioner to prove that he was responsible for the murder of deceased Mst. Sabri, a girl of about 8/9 years. There is no ground to disbelieve their evidence because the prosecution witnesses had no motive to falsely charge the petitioner with the crime. The medical evidence also shows that Mst. Sabri was strangulated. In these circumstances, the conviction of the petitioner is based on proper appreciation of the evidence. There is no ground to interfere. The petition is dismissed.