' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 22nd of May, 1988, whereby the acquittal of respondent No,1 on charges under section 302/377, P.P.C. And section 10/11 of Ordinance No, VII of 1979 by the Speedy Court No,III was upheld and the State's Appeal against acquittal was dismissed.
2. Mst. Tayyaba, aged seven years went out of the house in the company of her younger brother Javed Muhammad aged one year at about Degarwela in order to provide the child some recreation outside. Mst. Nasrin (P.W.11) a resident of the locality found the child abandoned and weeping all alone. She brought him and handed him over to Mst. Farida (P.W.12). The search for Mst.
Tayyaba yielded no result on that day. The next morning i,e. On 1-2-1988 at 9-00 a.m, the dead body of Mst. Tayyaba was found in Kotha of Abadi of Sipra. She had been strangulated and assaulted sexually also. The anus and vagina were both injured. The swabs were found not stained with semen.
3. At the trial Naeemur Rehman (P.W.4) appeared to state that Qadeer Ahmad had confessed before him that he had committed a great blunder by committing sexual intercourse with a girl and then strangulated her. He sought his assistance in burying her but he did not lend a helping hand. He claimed to have seen the bag containing the deadbody from a distance. He, however, denied having reported the event to any one till contacted by the Police. Riaz Hussain P.W.8 was produced to state about having last seen the deceased alongwith the respondent but he did not make such a statement whereupon he was declared hostile and cross-examined.
4. The Speedy Court examined every piece of evidence and came to the conclusion that "the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against Qadeer Ahmad accused". State's appeal against the acquittal was dismissed in limine, by the impugned judgment. The Judges observed as hereunder:- "We have gone through the reasonings of the leanred trial Judge. We are convinced that the conclusions arrived at by the learned trial Judge about the reliability of the testimonies of these witnesses do not call for any interference. We are particularly carried by the conduct of P.W.3 in not disclosing the alleged extra-judicial confession to any one for three days which pertained to a case which had gained sensational importance because of the heinous manner in which the crime was committed. It is on record that there were protest gatherings for the arrest of the culprits. Had the accused made disclosure of having committed the crime, P.W.3 could not have restrained from disclosing that earlier. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to make out any probable case even warranting interference in the impugned judgment of acquittal."
5. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Vehniwal, Advocate, the learned counsel appearing for the State, stated that the testimony of Naeemur Rehman coupled with the evidence of last seen provided by Riaz alongwith the recovery of the dead body should have been consdidered sufficient for recording conviction of the respondent.
6. As regards the extra-judicial confession, P.W.3 Naeemur Rehman stated as follows:- "I did not disclose this occurrence to my elder brother or father. I did not state anything about facts of this case to any one in the factory. I did not narrate this occurrence to any one before making statement before police. The police had visited my house when I was in factory. My father came to me in factory and informed me about visit of police to our house. At that time a police constable was with my father. I accordingly went to Sipra Dera with the said constable-- '....... I did not attend factory job from 2-2-1988 till today. During this period I was in the house of my maternal aunt (Khala). I stayed with my Khala out of fear. I did not state these facts to any one till today: Syed Riaz Hussain (P.W.8) made the following statement and it was not at all evidence of last seen:- "On 31-1-1988 at about Asar prayer time I was going from my house to bring fodder. When I reached near Dera Sipra I saw Tayyaba Bibi deceased playing near the Dera. I saw that Qadeer accused was proceeding towards his Dera alongwith dog. I proceeded to my field. I did not see Qadeer accused taking away Mst. Tayyaba."
7. The evidence produced at the trial was considered by the trial Court insufficient for establishing the charge against the respondent. The conclusions drawn by the trial Court have been affirmed by the impugned judgment by the High Court. We consider that the safe dispensation of justice required that thorough scrutiny undertaken by the two Courts and no error of law or misreading of evidence has been pointed out to justify further scrutiny of the material. Hence leave to appeal is refused.