Law: National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, (XVIII of 1999)

Section: 9(a)(vi)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 129(g)

National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----Ss. 9(a)(vi)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.129, illustration (g)---Misuse of authority---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Withholding of best evidence---Presumption---Prosecution assailed judgment of acquittal passed against accused by Trial Court---Validity---Proceedings relating to inquiry and investigation were initiated on a complaint but that complainant was not examined by prosecution---Another prosecution witness who allegedly made application for exchange of land in question was also not examined by prosecution---Prosecution had the prerogative to examine witnesses of its choice but where a material witness was not examined and best evidence was withheld, the Court could draw an adverse inference under illustration (g) of Art.129 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Courts were slow in interfering with acquittal judgment unless it was shown to be perverse, passed in gross violation of law suffering from errors of grave misreading or non-reading of evidence---Such judgments should not be lightly interfered and heavy burden was upon prosecution to rebut presumption of innocence which accused had earned and attained on account of his acquittal---Interference in judgment of acquittal was rare and prosecution must show that there were glaring errors of law and fact committed by Court in arriving at such decision, which would result into grave miscarriage of justice; acquittal judgment was perfunctory or wholly artificial or a shocking conclusion was drawn---Judgment of acquittal should not be interjected until findings were perverse, arbitrary, foolish, artificial, speculative and ridiculous---Court of appeal should not interfere simply for the reason that on reappraisal of evidence, a different conclusion could possibly be arrived at---Factual conclusions should not be upset, except when those were palpably perverse and suffering from serious and material factual infirmities---Acquitted accused acquired a triple presumption of innocence, which could not be dispelled by prosecution on any score---High Court declined to interfere in judgment of acquittal passed by Trial Court as the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492