Discovery of new facts

Petitioner sought review of order passed in constitutional petition with the plea that he being a disabled person was entitled to be considered for appointment as primary school teacher against the reserved quota of disabled persons

Validity

Ground raised in review petition was available to petitioner when the petition was argued but he did not raise the said contention at the relevant point of time

Petitioner had not sought appointment on the plea of disability

Petitioner was precluded from urging the contention in review proceedings which was not urged at the time of hearing

Assertion of petitioner did not constitute either an error apparent on the face of record or discovery of new and important facts and evidence on record, which grounds were sine qua non for exercising review jurisdiction

Review petition was dismissed in limine.

Whatever facts were mentioned in the allegedly recorded disclosure of accused, the Police had previously learnt, when the F.I.R., was registered

Such disclosure, could not be considered discovery of new fact within the meaning of Art.40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Sole testimony of ocular account furnished by prosecution witness, having already been discarded qua the involvement of accused in the crime, abscondence of accused, which was a corroborative piece of evidence, could not be taken into consideration in isolation

Misreading of evidence, in the case, had occasioned failure in the correct appraisal of evidence on record

Prosecution, having failed to prove case against accused beyond any reasonable doubt, benefit of doubt was extended in favour of accused

Accused was acquitted of the charge and was released, in circumstances.