MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR vs BASHIR AHMAD and others
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court whereby the respondent was acquitted of the charge under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question involves the propriety of the High Court's re-appraisal of evidence and reversal of the conviction recorded by the trial court. The Supreme Court held that the acquittal was based on flimsy reasons and hypotheses not supported by facts, noting that the prompt lodging of the F.I.R. was improperly viewed with suspicion and the testimony of an independent eyewitness was discarded without valid justification. The Court laid down that an acquittal based on unwarranted assumptions causes a miscarriage of justice, warranting the grant of leave to appeal to re-appraise the entire evidence for the safe dispensation of criminal justice.
- Whether the High Court was justified in discarding the testimony of an independent eyewitness without valid reasons?
- Does the prompt lodging of an F.I.R. reflect adversely on the prosecution case?
- When can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal against an order of acquittal?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' SH. RIAZ AHMED, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order dated 2-2-2000 whereby learned Judges of the Lahore High Court accepted the appeal of the respondent and acquitted him of the charge under section 302 of Pakistan Penal Code.
2. ' Respondent Muhammad Bashir was tried for the murder of deceased Bashir Ahmad and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chishtian Mandi found him guilty of the said charge and convicted and sentenced him to death vide judgment dated 17-3-1998. On appeal and reference, the learned Judges of the Lahore High Court acquitted him of the charge in terms of judgment impugned herein.
3. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we have gone through the judgment impugned. In our view the acquittal of the respondent is based upon flimsy reasons and on such hypothesis which is not supported by the facts and circumstances of the case. Occurrence in this case took place at 6-30 a.m., the police station is situated at a distance of 21 Kms. And the report was lodged at 7-30 a.m. The same day which would mean that the F.I.R. Was prompt and was lodged without any delay but the learned Judges observed that this promptness reflects upon the prosecution case as the daily diary must have been kept open by the police officials to wait for the first informant to lodge the report. We have further noticed that P.W.4 Anwar is an independent witness being a neighbour. Nothing has been brought on record to discredit him, therefore, in our view his testimony was brushed aside without any rhyme or reason.
4. ' Acquittal of respondent, prima facie, has caused the miscarriage of justice, therefore, to ensure the safe dispensation of criminal justice, we are inclined to grant leave to re-appraise the entire evidence. Let bailable warrants in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like