2012 PLP 56 (SCMR)

ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.

Zahid Pervaiz appellant and his three co-accused namely Sarfraz Ahmad, Munib Haider and Habib Ahmad had allegedly caused firearm injuries to one Amjad Ali at about 5-35 a.m. on 27-8-2004 in Chak No. 316/GB within the area of Police Station Chutiana, District Toba Tek Singh and F.I.R. No. 450 was lodged in that regard by one Manzoor Ullah at the said Police Station at about 12-45 p.m. on the same day in respect of offences under sections 324/337-F(i)/337-F(iii)/34/109, P.P.C. The appellant and has co-accused were arrested in connection with the said case and they were tried by the learned Magistrate section-30, Toba Tek Singh. Upon conclusion of the trial the appellants above mentioned co-accused were acquitted of the charge but vide judgment dated 19-7-2010 the appellant was convicted and sentenced for offences under sections 324, P.P.C., 337-F(iii), P.P.C. and 337.-F(i), P.P.C. The appellant preferred an appeal in that respect but his appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Toba Tek Singh on 25-8-2010. Subsequently the appellant filed Criminal Revision No. 947 of 2010 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore challenging his convictions and sentences but that revision petition also met the same fate and was dismissed by the honourable Chief Justice of the said Court vide judgment dated 1-2-2011. Hence, the present appeal by leave of the Court.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab appearing for the State and have gone through the record of this case with their assistance.

3. We have straightaway observed that in the F.I.R. lodged by Manzoor Ullah complainant a joint and collective allegation had been levelled against the present appellant and his three co-accused regarding effectively firing at the victim namely Amjad Ali and no specific injury to the victim had been attributed to them individually. Even during the trial the three eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution, i.e. Manzoor Ullah complainant (P.W.1), the injured victim namely Amjad Ali (P.W.2) and Muhammad Ramzan (P.W.5) had also failed to specify any particular injury caused by the present appellant to the injured victim and they had throughout maintained that the appellant and his three co-accused had collectively and jointly caused all the injuries to the victim. On account of acquittal of the appellant's three co-accused attributed effective firing at the victim the appellant could have been convicted only if the ocular account furnished in this case had received independent corroboration from some reliable source to his extent but that was not the case. All the above mentioned eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution were admittedly inimical towards the appellant on account of an on-going murder feud, the motive set up by the prosecution was quite vague and unspecific and the same had remained unproved, no weapon had been recovered from the appellant's possession during the investigation and the medical evidence was of no avail to the extent of the appellant because no specific injury had been attributed to him which could find support from the medical evidence. In these circumstances the conviction of the appellant was a legal impossibility on account of lack of independent corroboration and a reference in this respect may be made to the cases of Ghulam Sikandar and another v. Mamaraz Khan and others (PLD 1985 SC 11), Sarfraz alias Sappi and 2 others v. The State (2000 SCMR 1758), Iftikhar Hussain and others v. The State (2004 SCMR 1185) and Akhtar Ali and others v. State (2008 SCMR 6).

4. For what has been discussed above this appeal is allowed, the convictions and sentences of the appellant recorded and upheld by the learned courts below are set aside and he is acquitted of the charge by extending the benefit of doubt to him. He shall be released from the jail forthwith if not required to be detained in connection with any other case. M.H./Z-6/SC Appeal allowed.