KHADIM HUSSAIN M. SHAIKH, J. The captioned appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.11.2019, passed by the learned 21st Judicial Magistrate at Karachi West, in Direct Complaint No.01 of 2019, re-Mst. Sunila Mushtaq v. Babar Hussain and others, for offence under sections 509, 506/2, P.P.C. read with section 5(f)(j) and (k) of the DV Prevention and Protection Act, 2013, whereby respondents, namely, (1) Babar Hussain son of Taskheer Hussain, (2) Muddasir Hussain son of Babar Hussain, (3) Syed Sageer Ahmed son of Noor Muhammad, (04) Mst. Afshan Manan widow of Amjad, (05) Mst Anjum Naz wife of Babar Hussain and (06) Mst, Saira Bano wife of Sageer Ahmed, have been acquitted of the charge, extending them benefit.of doubt.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that appellant Mst. Sunila Mushtaq had filed the subject Direct Complaint, alleging therein that the respondents, who are her close relatives, misbehaved with her and used filthy language and extended threats of dire consequences to her; they further tried to turn out her from the house along with her children and they were continuously harassing, pressurizing and torturing her by physical violence through different means. The learned trial Court took cognizance of the case and issued process against the respondents, who in response thereof, joined the trial.
3. After completing the formalities, a formal charge was framed against the respondents, to which they pleaded 'not guilty' and claimed to be tried.
4. At the trial, complaint Mst. Sunila Mushtaq examined herself at Ex.03 as PW-1, who produced notice dated 27.01.2018 at Ex 03/A; PW-02 Mst. Zainab at Ex.04, who produced images at Ex.04/A to 04/D; PW-03 Sultan Ahmed at Ex.05; and, then her side was closed. After the closure of side of the complainant, the statements of the respondents were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C, wherein they denying the allegations of the complainant, professed their innocence and claimed to have been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant due to family dispute over the property matter.
5. At the conclusion of trial and after hearing the parties counsel, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondents of the charge vide impugned judgment dated 30.11 2019.
6. Having felt aggrieved by the said judgment, complainant Mst. Sunila Mushtaq ['the appellant'] has preferred the present appeal.
7. It is, inter alia, contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence brought on record; that the appellant by examining herself and two witnesses has proved its case against the respondents beyond the reasonable doubt; and, that the impugned judgment, passed by the learned trial Court is illegal and prays that this criminal acquittal appeal may be allowed and the respondents may be convicted.
8. Respondents Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, namely, Babar Hussain, Syed Sagheer Ahmed, Mst. Afshan Manan, Mst. Anjum and Mst. Saira Bano, who are present in person and the learned Deputy Prosecutor General, supporting the impugned judgment have contended that the learned trial Court has recorded their acquittal after evaluating the evidence brought on the record; and, that there is no illegality in the impugned judgment, passed by the learned trial Court and they pray that this criminal acquittal appeal may be dismissed.
9. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, the respondents, Babar Hussain, Syed Sagheer Ahmed, Mst. Afshan Manan, Mst. Anjum Naz and Mst. Saira Bano in person and the learned Deputy Prosecutor General and have gone through the material brought on the record.
10. From a perusal of the record it would be seen that neither date, time and place of any specific incident is shown by the appellant in her complaint nor has she mentioned name of any person to be the witness of the threats allegedly issued by the respondents to her; even date of alleged dispossession of the appellant from the house in question was not shown in the direct complaint; P.W.1 appellant Mst. Sunila Mushtaq had stated that her sister-in-law namely Gul Afshan entered in her house along with her articles to which complainant asked her that how she entered in the house without permission; that Mst. Afshan became angry and used filthy language against the complainant and her husband and brother-in-law Sultan and sister-in-law Mst. Zainab; and, that Mst. Anjum also misbehaved with her, while P.W. Mst. Zainab had deposed that Sultan Ahmed and Mushtaque Ahmed asked Mst. Afshan for their entry in the house; P.W-1 Mst. Sunila Mushtaque deposed that accused Mst. Saira issued threats to her that she would kill her, while P.W-2 Mst.
Zainab did not depose a single word regarding issuing of threats of killing to complainant by accused Mst. Saira; P.W-2 Mst. Zainab Sultan deposed that she and her husband were living with P.W-1 Mst. Sunila Mushtaque jointly and they were evicted from the house, while P.W-1 complainant Mst. Sunila Mushtaque deposed that P.W-2 Mst. Zainab and Sultan were not living with her in the house; although PW-1 Mst. Sunila Mushtaque claimed to have been caused physical violence to her by the respondents by maltreating her, but she had neither produced any evidence to show that she had received any injury nor did she produce any medical certificate. Apart from the above material discrepancies and infirmities in the prosecution case, rendering it doubtful, there were many other material contradictions, infirmities, dishonest improvements and admissions of the PWs made during the trial, which need not to be discussed here just to save the time and space; undisputedly there is dispute on the property between the parties, who are related in that respondent Mst. Afshan Manan, Mst. Anjum Naz and Mst. Saira Bano are sisters of Mushtaq Ahmed, who is husband of appellant Mst. Sunila Mushtaq and respondent No.3 Syed Sagheer Ahmed is husband of respondent No.6 Mst. Saira Bano and Mst. Anjum Naz is wife of respondent No.1 Babar Hussain, who is father of respondent No.2 Mudassir Hussain; patently, the matter was purely of civil nature, but the complainant by filing the subject direct complaint had attempted to convert the civil dispute into a criminal case; there was absolutely no evidence worth consideration to establish any accusations against the respondents; the learned 21st Judicial Magistrate at Karachi West, after evaluating the evidence brought on record, recorded the acquittal of the respondents, rightly so, as the complainant had miserably failed to prove her case against the respondents beyond the reasonable doubt. It is reiterated that the principles for appreciation of evidence in appeal against the acquittal are now well settled, for, an accused is presumed to be innocent and if after trial, he is acquitted, he earns double presumption of innocence and acquittal judgment or order normally does not call for any interference unless it is found arbitrary, capricious, fanciful, artificial, shocking and ridiculous and while evaluating the evidence, difference is to be maintained in an appeal from conviction and an acquittal appeal and in the latter case the interference is to be made only when there is non-reading and gross mis-reading of the evidence, resulting the miscarriage of justice and on perusal of the evidence no other decision can be given except that the accused is guilty. Reliance in this context is placed on the cases of Yar Muhammad and 3 others v. The State (1992 SCMR 96), Muhammad Shafi v. Muhammad Raza and another (2008 SCMR 329), State/Government of Sindh through Advocate General, Sindh, Karachi v. Sobharo (1993 SCMR 585) Muhammad Yaqoob v. Manzoor Hussain and 3 others (2008 SCMR 1549) and State and others v. Abdul Khaliq and others (PLD 2011 SC 554). Under these circumstances, I am of the considered view that the impugned acquittal judgment, which is apt to the facts and circumstances of the case, suffering from no illegality or any perversity or misreading or non- reading of the evidence, calls for no interference and this criminal acquittal appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. These are the reasons of short order announced by me on 16.09.2020, whereby the instant criminal acquittal appeal was dismissed.