ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Acquittal Appeal.No.S-20 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

Before:

                                                      Mr.Justice Irshad Ali Shah.

01.For orders on office objection “A”

02.For hearing of main case.

10.09.2020

Mr.Khadim Hussain Khoso, Advocate for appellant

                                  -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

01.                  Deferred.

02.                  The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant acquittal appear are that the appellant filed a direct complaint, it was brought on record and after due trial, it ended in shape of acquittal of the private respondents, by learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Qamber, vide judgment dated 29.01.2020, which is impugned before this Court by the appellant.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned trial Court has acquitted the private respondents without lawful justification and on the basis of improper assessment of the evidence, therefore, such acquittal is liable to be examined by this Court by way of instant criminal acquittal appeal.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.         

                        The acquittal recorded on a direct complaint as per mandate contained by provision of Sub Section (2) of Section 417 Cr.PC, is to be impugned after grant of special leave to appeal, which is not obtained by the appellant, for no obvious reason. In absence of such leave, acquittal recorded on a direct complaint could hardly be examined. Be that as it may, the instant direct complaint is filed with delay of one month and such could not be lost sight of. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court obviously was right to record acquittal of the private respondents by extending them benefit of doubt and such acquittal is not found to have been recorded in arbitrary or cursory manner, which may call for interference by this Court.  

                        In case of The State and others vs. Abdul Khaliq and others     (PLD 2011 SC-554), it is held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that;

“The scope of interference in appeal against acquittal is most narrow and limited, because in an acquittal the presumption  of innocence is significantly added to the cardinal rule of criminal jurisprudence, that an accused shall be presumed to be innocent until proved guilty; in other words, the presumption of innocence is doubled. The courts shall be very slow in interfering with such an acquittal judgment, unless it is shown to be perverse, passed in gross violation of law, suffering from the errors of grave misreading or non-reading of the evidence; such judgments should not be lightly interfered and heavy burden lies on the prosecution to rebut the presumption of innocence which the accused has earned and attained on account of his acquittal. Interference in a judgment of acquittal is rare and the prosecution must show that there are glaring errors of law and fact committed by the Court in arriving at the decision, which would result into grave miscarriage of justice; the acquittal judgment is perfunctory or wholly artificial or a shocking conclusion has been drawn. Judgment of acquittal should not be interjected until the findings are perverse, arbitrary, foolish, artificial, speculative and ridiculous. The Court of appeal should not interfere simply for the reason that on the reappraisal of the evidence a different conclusion could possibly be arrived at, the factual conclusions should not be upset, except when palpably perverse, suffering from serious and material factual infirmities”.

                        In view of facts and reasons discussed above, the instant Criminal Acquittal appeal is dismissed in limine.

                                                                                                J U D G E