Malik MASHOOD AHMED vs JAFAR and 2 others
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal against the acquittal of the respondents, Jaffar and Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, in a murder case. The respondents were originally tried for the murder of Wajid Ali, the husband of Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, based on allegations of an illicit liaison. The trial court acquitted the respondents, citing the failure of the main eyewitness to support the prosecution's version, an unexplained 12-hour delay in lodging the First Information Report, the lack of independent corroboration for the complainant's testimony, and the complainant's established enmity toward the respondent. The Supreme Court reviewed the findings of both the trial court and the High Court. The Court held that the acquittal was based on correct premises and that the reasoning provided by the lower courts was neither fanciful nor capricious. Consequently, the Supreme Court found no justification for interference, dismissed the petition, and declined to grant leave to appeal, thereby upholding the acquittal of the respondents.
- Can an appellate court interfere with an acquittal if the trial court's reasoning is neither fanciful nor capricious?
- Is the solitary statement of an inimical complainant sufficient to sustain a conviction in a murder case without independent corroboration?
- Does an unexplained delay in lodging an FIR constitute a valid ground for acquittal?
' QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 7-5-2001 of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby his appeal against acquittal of the respondents Jaffar and Mst. Shahnaz Bibi in a murder case was dismissed.
2. The respondents were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala for the murder of one Wajid Ali, husband of respondent Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, but were acquitted vide judgment dated 27-11-2000.
3. The occurrence took place on the night between 11/12-2-1999. It was alleged in the F.I.R. That the respondents had developed an illicit liaison and in order to get married had eliminated the deceased.
4. The respondents were acquitted on the grounds; (i) the main eyewitness Zulfiqar Ali (P.W.5) had not supported the prosecution version and had also exonerated the respondents by stating that they were not present in the house of the deceased on the fateful night, (ii) the delay of 12 hours in lodging the F.I.R. Had not been explained, (iii) the solitary statement of the complainant, who is brother of the deceased, was not by itself sufficient to sustain the conviction particularly when it stood established on the record that he is inimically disposed towards the respondent Jaffar and
(iv) the testimony of the complainant had not been corroborated by any independent evidence.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the record we find that the respondents were acquitted on correct premises and grounds of their acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court and discussed and upheld by the learned Judges, in the High Court cannot be termed as fanciful or capricious so as to justify interference.
' Accordingly, this petition is dismissed and leave declined.