ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 75 of 2022

(Abdul Kareem vs. Ferhan Ali and others)

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. For orders on M.A.No. 1459/2022

2. For hearing of main case

06.06.2023

Appellant present in person

Mr. Abrar Ali Khichi Addl. P.G

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged by the appellant that he was selling material to the private respondents to be used by them for manufacturing plastic shoppers, which they stolen without making him any payment by committing breach of trust. By maintaining such allegation, he lodged FIR for the above incident. On conclusion of trial, the private respondents were acquitted by learned XV-Judicial Magistrate Karachi West vide judgment dated 05.01.2022, which he has impugned before this Court by preferring the instant acquittal appeal.

2. It is contended by the appellant that the learned trial Magistrate has recorded acquittal of the private respondents without lawful justification and on the basis of improper assessment of the evidence; therefore, such acquittal is to be examined by this Court.

3. Learned Addl. P.G for the state by supporting the impugned judgment has sought for dismissal of instant acquittal appeal.

4. Heard arguments and perused the record.

5. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of more than 03 months such delay having not been explained plausible; the parties apparently, were found to have been disputed over settlement of accounts on purchase and sale of material to be used for manufacturing of plastic shoppers. In these circumstances, learned Magistrate was right to record acquittal of private respondents by extending them benefit of doubt as such their acquittal is not found to be arbitrary or cursory to be interfered with by this Court.

6. In case of State and others vs. Abdul Khaliq and others (PLD 2011 SC-554), it has been 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”.

7. In view of above, the instant Acquittal Appeal fails and is dismissed accordingly.

JUDGE