THE STATE vs RAFAQAT HUSSAIN SHAH
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the State against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which acquitted the respondent, Rafaqat Hussain Shah, of the charge of murdering Ruqia Bibi under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court’s acquittal was based on a sound appraisal of evidence or if it suffered from legal infirmity, such as misreading or non-reading of material evidence. The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal, finding that the ocular testimony provided by the prosecution witnesses was unreliable, as they were chance witnesses whose presence at the scene was highly doubtful. Furthermore, the court noted that the ocular testimony lacked corroboration from medical evidence and that the motive attributed to the respondent was insufficient to establish guilt. The Supreme Court held that the High Court’s assessment of the evidence was free from legal error and dismissed the petition, affirming that an acquittal based on a proper evaluation of evidence will not be disturbed.
- Can an acquittal be overturned if the appellate court's appraisal of evidence does not suffer from misreading or non-reading of material facts?
- Is the testimony of chance witnesses sufficient to sustain a conviction when it lacks corroboration from medical evidence?
- Does the absence of a strong motive weaken the prosecution's case in a murder trial?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---This petition is directed against the judgment, dated 11-4-2001 of the Lahore High Court through which on acceptance of appeal filed by the respondent-convict, his conviction under section 302(b), P.P.C. For causing death of Ruqia Bibi and award of sentence of death has been set aside and he has been acquitted of the charge.
2. The respondent was tried for the murder of Ruqia Bibi. According to the F.I.R., motive as disclosed was that Rafaqat Hussain Shah, respondent and Zia-ur-Rehman, brother of Ruqia Bibi deceased were married in the same family. The wife of Zia-ur-Rehman wanted divorce from him (Zia-ur- Rehman) which was being opposed both by Zia-ur-Rehman and Ruqia Bibi. Refaqat Hussain Shah, respondent allegedly was supporting the wife of Zia-ur-Rehman for getting divorce due to which he allegedly caused the murder of Ruqia Bibi because she was opposing the said divorce.
3. The ocular account was furnished by lnayat Shah (P.W.2) and Shabir Shah (P.W.3). They though were residents of the same Illaqa but in different streets. They were admittedly chance witnesses.
In the statement made before the police under section 161, Cr.P.C. By P.W.2 only one injury was attributed to the respondent whereas improvement was made when he appeared in the evidence and deposed that three injuries were inflicted to the deceased.
4. The learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court after examining the evidence of these two witnesses in detail came to the conclusion that their presence in front of the house at the relevant time was highly doubtful,
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to persuade us that in these circumstances, Rafaqat respondent had any reason to go to the extent of causing death of Ruqia Bibi in respect of a matter of divorce between Zia-ur-Rehman, brother of Ruqia Bibi and his wife. The ocular testimony of these witnesses does not find corroboration from medical evidence.
6. The appraisal of evidence undertaken by the learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court for recording findings of acquittal does not suffer from any legal infirmity such as misreading or non- reading of any material piece of evidence, therefore, in our considered view, the impugned judgment does not suffer from any illegality.
7. Resultantly this petition is dismissed and .