Law: Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302 & 304-A

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 417, 403 & 430

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- Ss. 302 & 304-A read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 417, 403 & 430; Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 13 and Maxim "nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa"-Double jeopardy, principle of-State appeal-Respondent tried for murder and causing injuries pleading gun having "went off" accidentally when some boys played with same-Trial Court finding gun having been fired by respondent and not by boys but holding respondent having had no intention of firing at deceased or any other person and therefore convicting him only under S. 304-A, Penal Code, 1860-State successfully contesting such order in High Court but Single Judge hearing appeal while dismissing appeal expressing view as to respondent having been guilty of murder and trial -Court having given no valid reason for reducing sentence-State, in view of such observations, filing appeal against appellant's acquittal but High Court Bench holding appeal to be not competent and dismissing same-Held: Respondent's acquittal on charge of murder by a competent Court became final on dismissal of his appeal by High Court-[Maxim-Appeal against acquittal].Whether the respondent's acquittal on the charge of murder be right or wrong, there has to be an end to litigation in every legal system, and in the instant case, on the dismissal of the respondent's appeal by the High Court, his acquittal on the charge of murder by a competent Court became final. It is true that the Single Judge, by whose this acquittal become final, had misgivings about the which he was upholding. But, he had the power to prevent that verdict from becoming final by adjourning the hearing of the appeal before him in order to enable the State to decide whether it should file an appeal against the respondent's acquittal on the charge of murder. And, this is pre�cisely what Munir, C. J., had done in P L D 1955 F C 20 when this appeal bad come up for hearing before him in the Lahore High Court. But, as the Single Judge did not follow this precedent, the result was that the of the Sessions Court acquitting the respondent on the charge of murder became final, and it cannot be re-opened on the…