Ghulam Rasul son of Gul Baig, Ghulam Rasul son of Muhammad Nawaz petitioners alongwith Misri Khan and Mumtaz were tried under section 457/380/411,P.P.C.
2. The charge against them was that golden and silver ornaments were stolen away from the house of Sher Muhammad P.W. On the night between 8/9-1-1978. Muhammad Ashiq, S.I. P.W.7 had recovered the ornaments Exh.P.1 to P.21 from the petitioners and the co-accused under section 550, Cr.P.C. As suspected stolen property. Prosecution produced 7 witnesses. On the conclusion of the trial, all the accused were convicted under section 411, P.P.C. And sentenced to 3 years' R.I. Each. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, acquitted Misri Khan and Mumtaz but upheld the conviction and sentence of the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the recovery witnesses namely Muhammad Hussain P.W.4 and Mala P.W.6, who have been believed for convicting the petitioners were also witness of the incriminating recoveries from the acquitted accused and that there was no independent corroboration of their statements against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the Appellate Court.
4. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that Muhammad Hussain P.W. 4, Mala P.W.6 and Muhammad Ashiq, S.I. P.W.7 were the recovery witnesses. They stated that in their presence the ornaments were also recovered from Misri Khan and Mumtaz. Their statements have not been acted upon against the two acquitted accused. So, the rule of prudence did require independent corroboration of their statements qua the petitioners, which is not available in this case. For these reasons, I feel that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the petitioners beyond reasonable doubts. So, the revision is accepted. The conviction and sentence of the petitioners is set aside and they are acquitted of the charge.