' FAROOQ ALI CHANNA , J.---Appellant being aggrieved with the judgment dated 26-4-2008 passed by IIIrd Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Sukkur in Criminal Complaint No,146 of 2004 re: the State v. Ghulam Qadir and others, whereby the respondents were acquitted under section 245(1), Cr.P.C. Has assailed the acquittal of the respondents through the instant criminal acquittal appeal.
1. The facts giving rise to filing of the instant criminal acquittal appeal are that the respondents Ghulam Qadir fired a civil suit on the basis of agreement to sale purported to have been forged sale agreement. Hence application was moved to DPO Sukkur who after inquiry ordered the registration of F.I.R. No,55 of 2003. Respondents were arrested, they applied for bail which was declined by the trial Court so also Additional Sessions Judge, thereafter they approached this for want of bail. During arguments the purported forged sale agreement was examined by this Court and came to the conclusion that it was clear case of forgery, manipulation and tampering of the document produced before this Court with mala fide intention to mislead the Court for seeking the relief of bail therefore, this Court ordered the Additional Registrar to file criminal complaint against the respondents under section 193, 196, 463 and 471, P.P.C. The trial Court after recording the evidence and hearing the counsel .Of both the parties acquitted the respondents vide judgment dated 26-4-2008 which is impugned in the instant criminal acquittal appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents at the very outset raised question of the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that (i) the instant criminal acquittal appeal has been filed without want of special leave as required under section 417(2), Cr.P.C. And (ii) the appellant is not competent to file the appeal as neither he was complainant nor aggrieved person of the findings recorded in the impugned judgment.
' Appellant Mian Mumtaz Rabbani advocate, while controverting the legal objections raised by the counsel for the respondents has argued that by virtue of subsection (2-A) of section 417, Cr.P.C. The statutory right is conferred upon the aggrieved person to file the appeal against the acquittal without grant of special leave as required under subsection (2) of section 417, Cr.P.C. In support of his contention, he has relied upon a case reported as Abdul Jalil v. Zulfiqar Ali and others (1998 PCr.LJ 617). The appellant with regard to the other objection has contended that the respondents in their statement recorded under section 342; Cr.P.C. While answering to a question have levelled the serious allegations against him that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated by Mian Mumtaz Rabbani (appellant) who himself made correction in the disputed document, as such the appellant has suffered injuries, became aggrieved person of the impugned judgment passed in Criminal Complaint No,146 of 2004 and competent to file appeal against the acquittal of respondents.
4. I have perused the record. There is no cavil to proposition of law that appeal in a case instituted upon a complaint against acquittal the same could only be filed upon the grant of special leave by the High Court in terms of subsection (2) of section 417, Cr.P.C. Within 60 days of the acquittal, direct appeal against acquittal could not be entertained under subsection (3) of section 417, Cr.P.C.
However, after insertion of subsection (2-A) of section 417, Cr.P.C. Through second amendment Act, 1994' in the Criminal Procedure Code any person aggrieved by an order of acquittal has statutory right as contemplated under A subsection (2-A) of section 417, Cr.P.C. To prefer an appeal to High Court against acquittal within 30 days of order of acquittal without applying for special leave.
5. The instant Criminal Acquittal appeal has been filed within the period of 30 days, the same is maintainable, in view of observation of this Court recorded in the matter of Abdul Jalil v. Zulfiqar Ali another (Supra) which reads as under:-- "Viewed in this context it is apparent that subsection (2-A) in section 417 was designed to give effect to Shariat Principles conferring a right to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal upon any person aggrieved by such order in addition to and without affecting the right available under other provisions. It must, necessarily, follow that if the appellant fulfils the conditions laid down in this subsection his appeal would be maintainable, irrespective of the question whether he could also prefer an appeal under any other provision of section 417."
6. So far other objection with regard to the status of appellant being aggrieved person or otherwise is concerned, the aggrieved person has been defined by the apex Court in various cases to be a person who has suffered a legal grievance, a man against whom a decision has been made pronounced which has wrongfully deprived him of or wrongfully refused him of something, or wrongfully affected his title to something, having personal interest in the performance of the legal duty which if not performed or performed in a manner not permitted by law would% result in the loss of some personal benefits or advantages or the curtailment of a privilege or liberty or franchise. In the case in hand the trial Court while passing the impugned judgment has passed no observation against the appellant depriving him of his legal rights protected under the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan nor resulted in the loss of personal benefits and of advantages of the appellant.
7. The only grievance of the appellant is that the respondents in their statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Have stated that they have falsely been implicated by Mian Mumtaz Rabbani (appellant) who himself has made correction/tampering in the disputed document. The trial Court while passing the impugned judgment has not given importance to the above answer of the respondents nor the said answer is the base of acquittal of the respondents. As such the answer of the respondents will not affect or cause injuries to any right of appellant, accordingly the appellant does not come within the purview of an aggrieved person hence is not entitled to file the appeal against acquittal however, if he feels affectee of the answer of the respondents, would be at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy provided under the law for redressal of his grievance. Criminal acquittal appeal is dismissed.