MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs MUHAMMAD IRSHAD and anothers
This criminal appeal challenges the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Hafizabad, which acquitted the respondent of charges. The core legal question concerns whether the trial court's acquittal was based on a proper appreciation of evidence. The trial court had acquitted the respondent after finding significant discrepancies in the prosecution's case, including the failure to produce eye-witnesses, the implausibility of the complainant hearing the victim's alarm from a distance of two acres, and contradictions in the victim's testimony regarding her injuries and medical examination findings. Additionally, the court noted the absence of recovered firearm empties despite the complainant's claim of shots being fired. Upon review, the appellate court found that the appellant failed to demonstrate any factual or legal error in the trial court's findings. Consequently, the court held that the trial court's assessment of the evidence was sound and that the acquittal was justified. The appeal was dismissed in limine, affirming the principle that an appellate court will not interfere with an acquittal judgment where the trial court's reasoning is supported by the record and free from material misappreciation.
- Can an appellate court interfere with an acquittal judgment when the appellant fails to show that the trial court's findings were incorrect or contradictory to the record?
- Is the testimony of a complainant reliable when they claim to have heard an alarm from a distance of two acres while adjacent neighbors did not?
- Does the failure of the prosecution to recover firearm empties, despite claims of shots being fired, constitute a valid ground for the trial court to doubt the prosecution's version of events?
' SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR, J.--- This appeal is directed against judgment, dated 6-12-1999, by Sessions Judge, Hafizabad, whereby learned Sessions Judge had acquitted the respondent.
2. Occurrence in this case, allegedly, had taken place on 9-1-1998. The F.I.R. Was lodged on the same day by Muhammad Ashraf, P.W.2, real brother of Mst. Bushra Bibi (victim). Muhammad Hanif and Nasir Ali were named as eye-witnesses of the occurrence. They were given up and not produced before the trial Court. Learned trial Judge vide reasons given in para. No,9 of the judgment concluded that the only safe presumption that can be drawn about those witnesses can be that they had either not seen the occurrence or no occurrence had taken place.
3. Muhammad Ashraf, complainant, who had appeared as P.W.2, was disbelieved by the learned trial Judge, observing that he had admitted during cross-examination that he had reached the spot after hearing alarm raised by Mst. Bushra Bibi, from her house, which was at a distance of 2 acres from his house. Learned trial Judge concluded that alarm raised by Mst. Bushra Bibi could not have been heard by Muhammad Ashraf, P.W.2, while being in his house at a distance of 2 acres.
In that regard, learned trial Judge also noted that Naik Muhammad Gujjar and Qaim Din whose houses were adjacent to the house wherefrom Mst. Bushra Bibi had raised alarm, had also not heard the alarm raised.
4. Learned trial Judge discarded the testimony of Mst. Bushra Bibi on two grounds. Firstly, learned trial Judge observed that the statement made by her that she had suffered an injury on the mouth during the occurrence was contradictory to the statement, Exh.D.A. Made by her before the police, during investigation and secondly for the reason that Mst. Bushra Bibi who was unmarried girl should have been a virgin but the lady doctor who had medically examined her, had not found her virgin. She had, also not found any fresh tears on the vagina. Her Shalwar was also not proved to be stained with semen.
5. Another important fact, observed and noted by the learned trial Judge, which finds mention in para. No,10 of the judgment, is, that according to the complainant, accused had fired 2/3 shots but neither police had found the empties lying there nor the complainant had produced those empties before the police, during investigation.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant on being pointed out all those observations and findings of the trial Judge, on being given opportunity after going through the record and judgment, failed to show as to how those findings were incorrect, were contradictory to the facts on record.
' After having gone through the evidence, perusing the judgment and hearing the learned counsel, we are convinced that there is no merit in this appeal, the same is, therefore, dismissed in limine.
Cited by 1 case
- TALIB HUSSAIN Versus STATE 2001 YLR 2423