2003 PLP 538 (SCMR)
NAZIRA‑‑‑Petitoner Versus MUKHTAR AHMED and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 538 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Paldstan |
| Bench Members | Sh. Riaz Ahmad C. J., Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ |
| Parties | NAZIRA‑‑‑Petitoner Versus MUKHTAR AHMED and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 538 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 538 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Paldstan bench comprising: Sh. Riaz Ahmad C. J., Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 538 (SCMR) (NAZIRA‑‑‑Petitoner Versus MUKHTAR AHMED and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- C.M. Latif Rawn, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 5th March, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9‑5‑2001 of. the Lahore High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1135 of 2000). (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ ‑‑‑‑S.302(b)/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal against acquittal‑‑‑No injury was attributed to accused who had allegedly made ineffective firing‑‑‑Recoveries effected from the accused were insignificant on account of non‑recovery of any crime empty from the spot‑‑ High Court had justifiably and competently acquitted the accused of the charge for the reasons based on correct application of law and proper evaluation of evidence existing on record‑‑‑Formation of another view of the evidence would hardly constitute a valid ground for interference with the acquittal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ ‑‑‑‑S.302(b)/34‑‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑‑Appreciation of evidence‑‑ Merely because another view of the evidence can be formed hardly constitutes a valid ground to interfere with the acquittal.
Judgment & Decree
SH. RIAZ AHMAD, C.J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal calls in question acquittal of respondents on the charge under section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code for the murder of Shahbaz deceased. Initially, they were tried by an Additional Sessions Judge at Sargodha and were convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.50.000 each as compensation in terms of section 544‑A, Criminal Procedure Code to the legal heirs of deceased, or in default, to further suffer S.I. for six months each with benefit as contemplated by section 382‑B, Criminal Procedure Code. They were acquitted of the charge under section 324, Pakistan Penal Code.
2. On appeal a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court seized of the appeal adverting to the facts and merits of the case held that motive was attributed to Saif Ullah who was responsible to have caused fatal blow to deceased and not to respondents. It may be stated that Saif Ullah had become absconder and was subsequently tried. No injury whatsoever was attributed to respondents except ineffective firing and though recoveries were effected A from them but obviously they were insignificant on account of absence of any crime empty having been recovered from the spot. Thus, in our view the learned Judge had justifiably and competently set aside the conviction of the respondents and the reasons advanced to acquit the respondents of the charge are based on correct application of law and proper evaluation of evidence existing on record. It is now well established that merely because another g view of the evidence can be formed hardly constitutes a valid ground to interfere with the acquittal. For the foregoing reasons we do not find any merit and substance in C this petition and dismiss it accordingly. Leave to appeal is declined. Leave refused.