1. SALAHUDDIN AHMAD, J-- This petition for special leave to appeal is from an order of the Lahore High Court refusing to interfere with an order of acquittal.
2. Respondents Nos. 1 to 6 were tried for conspiracy to murder Waryam, deceased son of the petitioner, but were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mianwali. The petitioner accordingly moved the High Court in revision but failed.
3. The prosecution relied on the ocular evidence of Court witnesses, the motive for the crime and recoveries of weapons from the accused persons as well as recovery of some crime empties from the spot. The learned Sessions Judge found all the eye-witnesses not only closely related to the deceased but also inimical towards the accused persons and on a consideration of their evidence, the learned Judge felt that they did not inspire confidence. So' far as the recoveries are concerned, apparently they were not relied on by the prosecution itself in view of the fact that the empties were not marched with the weapons recovered from the accused persons.
4. It has been contended before us that one of the eye-witnesses, accused P. W. 9' Muhammad Sadiq also being related to the persons, should not have been held to be an interested and inimical witness. Apart from the recoveries which were not relied on by the prosecution itself and not believed by the trial Court, there is no corroboration of the evidence of the eye--witnesses who are definitely interested persons.
5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the High Court conceded that there was no corroboration by any independent circumstance to connect any one of the accused persons with the crime. It further appears that the medical evidence also does not support the prosecution case. Although the prosecution alleged that three of the accused persons had shot and hit the deceased, the Doctor found only two injuries of entry and two injuries of exit on the body of deceased Waryam which showed that only two shots were fired at the deceased. The evidence disclosed a case of long standing enmity between the parties and all the eye-witnesses were admittedly of partisan character. In these circumstances we do not think that the High Court acted improperly in refusing to interfere with the order of acquittal. There is no substance in this petition.
6. This petition is accordingly dismissed.