ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- Abdul Ghani petitioner has filed the present petition against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court maintaining the acquittal of the respondents.
2. The facts, briefly, are that 6 respondents were tried for the murder of Muhammad Aslam and making murderous assault on Allah Ditta P.W.13. Muhammad Akram P.W.14 and Jamal Din P.W.15, at Laudewela on 9-8-1969 in the area of Rakh Bharoke, District Gujranwala. All the accused were arrested. After his arrest Wali Muhammad (respondent No.3) led to the recovery of a gun and a revolver Exhs. P.23 and P.24, respectively, while Iqbal son of Fazal (respondent No.5) led to the recovery of a revolver and Anwarul Haq (respondent No.2) led to the recovery of a .12-bore gun (P.22). No opinion, could, however, be given as to whether or not these weapons matched with the empties recovered from the spot.
3. The prosecution case, therefore, rested entirely on the testimony of 5 eye-witnesses including the three injured persons named above. Fateh Muhammad accused gave a different version stating that there was an altercation between the parties over the payment of revenue and that he was attacked and injured with Dangs by Shafique, Akram and Ashraf of the complainant party. Soon thereafter Muhammad Aslam deceased came from behind and fired at him injuring a little girl named Ghafooran (aged about 10 years) who was present there, as also the injured P.Ws. Who had been attracted to the spot. He added that Iqbal son of Karam Bakhsh then arrived at the spot and raised a noise that the Lambardar was being killed. Muhammad Ahmad and Aslam fired at him.
Muhammad Ahmad fired his pistol. He was injured in the hand and he also fired his gun. He fired his gun towards Aslam etc".
This version was supported by Mst. Ghafoor at who was summoned by the learned trial Court as a Court Witness,
4. The learned trial Court felt that the statement of Mst. Ghafooran which supported the defence version raised sufficient doubt with regard to the veracity of the prosecution version and, invoking the principle laid down by this Court in Safdar Ali's case PLD 1953 FC 93, acquitted all the respondents giving them the benefit of doubt.
5. The State filed an appeal against the acquittal of the respondents but the High Court agreed with the view taken by the learned trial Court and -rejected the appeal.
Hence the present petition.
6. We have gone through the impugned judgments and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. We feel that in the circumstances of the case and in view of the evidence of Mst. Ghafooran the trial Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that sufficient doubt had been raised as to the correctness of the prosecution version. Since both the Courts below have given concurrent findings of fact after fully considering the evidence on the record we would not like to embark upon the exercise of reappraisal of evidence in this case.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.