1970 PLP 189 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ALI-Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1970 PLP 189 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Wahiduddin Ahmad, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ALI-Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND OTHERS-Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 189 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 189 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Wahiduddin Ahmad, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 PLP 189 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ALI-Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Ismail, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th January 1970.
- Muhammad Ismail, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 15th October 1969, in Criminal Revision No. 735 of 1969). Maxim: Autrefois acquit-Criminal trial of four accused-Two acquitted and two convicted-Neither complainant nor State moving appeal against acquittal-High Court, in appeal by convicted accused, setting aside conviction and ordering retrial-Contention that retrial meant reopening case against acquitted accused as well Held not correct.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑Four persons, namely, Ismail, Muhammad Ali, Mohammad Hussain and Nawab were put up for trial in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, under sections 542, 302 and 307, P. P.‑C., read with section 34, P. P. C. Part of the evidence was recorded by Mr. Amir Akbar Khan, Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, and rest by his successor Mr. Ahsanul Haq Sethi. As a result of the trial Ismail and Mohammad Hussain were convicted and sentenced to death while Nawab and Mohammad Ali, respondents, were acquitted. On appeal by the condemned‑prisoners and reference under sec tion 372, Cr. P. C., a Division Bench of the High Court set aside their convictions on the finding that the trial was bad in law as evidence was partly recorded by one Additional Sessions Judge and partly by his successor. Consequent upon it the case was remanded to the Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, for retrial. During the fresh trial Qazi Muhammad Dastgir, Additional Sessions Judge, deleted the names of Nawab and Mohammad Ali from the list of accused persons, in view of their earlier acquittal. The petitioner felt aggrieved thereby and filed a revision petition in the High Court, pleading that since the trial was set aside as a whole the acquittal of Nawab and Mohammad Ali, respondents, was also set aside and they should be retried along with Ismail and Mohammad Hussain. The petition was rejected following the principle of autrefois acquit embodied in section 403, Cr. P. C. Mr. Muhammad Ismail, appearing in support of the petition for leave to appeal, from the order of the High Court, was unable to cite any decided case in support of his contention that as the earlier trial was set aside by the High Court the acquittal of the respondents who were not even party to these proceeding also stood quashed. Neither the State nor the petitioner had moved the High Court against their acquittal. The respondent could not therefore, be retried on the same charges after the order of the acquittal had become final. The High Court has in our view rightly declined to call in question at this stage the acquittal of the respondents. The peti tion for leave to appeal is dismissed. Leave Refused