| Case ID |
41b49725-6eb3-4024-ab17-d1ec810d467a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. S-29 and M.A. No.3 0 |
| Decision Date |
May 09, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court, presided by Justice Imam Bux Baloch, dismissed the appeal filed by Syed Akbar Shah against the acquittal of MOOSO and eight others. The appellant failed to substantiate the claim of illegal occupancy of agricultural lands, as he admitted to selling portions of his land to the respondents through registered sale-deeds and agreements. The court emphasized the double presumption of innocence afforded to the acquitted respondents and underscored the necessity for the appellant to provide compelling evidence to overturn the acquittal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed due to the lack of sufficient evidence proving illegal dispossession by the respondents. |
| Summary |
In the Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. S-29 and M.A. No.3 04 of 2010, the Sindh High Court deliberated on a case involving Syed Akbar Shah as the appellant and MOOSO along with eight others as respondents. The appeal, decided on May 9, 2011, before Justice Imam Bux Baloch, revolved around allegations of illegal occupation of agricultural lands by the respondents. The appellant contended that the respondents had unlawfully seized his agricultural property without legal authority, a claim he sought to overturn following their acquittal in the trial court.
The case hinged on the interpretation and application of the Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005) and the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), specifically Section 3 of the former and Section 417(2-A) of the latter. The appellant argued that the trial court's acquittal of the respondents lacked a plausible explanation and failed to consider the prosecution evidence adequately, thereby resulting in a miscarriage of justice. However, during the proceedings, the appellant conceded that portions of his land were legally sold to the respondents through registered sale-deeds and agreements, weakening his stance on illegal dispossession.
The court meticulously reviewed the evidence presented, including various affidavits and witness testimonies. Notably, the appellant's admission of selling land through formal agreements nullified the claim of illegal occupation, as the respondents had lawful ownership post-purchase. Additionally, the court highlighted the principle of double presumption of innocence granted to acquitted individuals, underscoring the high burden of proof required to reverse such an acquittal.
The defense, represented by Altaf Hussain Surahiyo and Miss Rubina Dhamrah, effectively argued that the appellant failed to provide concrete evidence of illegal possession beyond the lawful transactions already recorded. They cited multiple precedents from previous cases, reinforcing the notion that acquittals should only be overturned with compelling evidence demonstrating the trial court's errors or oversight.
Justice Baloch emphasized the judiciary's responsibility to uphold the integrity of acquittal orders unless there is clear evidence of judicial misconduct or factual inaccuracies. He referred to landmark cases such as *Saira Bibi v. Muhammad Asif* and *Muhammad Aslam v. Sabir Hussain* to illustrate the stringent standards required to challenge acquittals successfully.
In conclusion, the Sindh High Court determined that the appellant had not met the necessary legal thresholds to prove illegal dispossession of his agricultural lands by the respondents. The acknowledgment of lawful sales through registered documents effectively dispelled the allegations of unauthorized occupation. Consequently, the court upheld the acquittal, dismissing the appellant's appeal and reaffirming the respondents' legal entitlement to the lands in question. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that acquittals are respected and only revisited when irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing emerges. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
MOOSO
|
| Judges |
Imam Bux Baloch
|
| Lawyers |
Imdad Ali Mashori for Appellant,
Altaf Hussain Surahiyo for Respondents,
Miss Rubina Dhamrah, State Counsel
|
| Petitioners |
Syed Akbar Shah
|
| Respondents |
MOOSO and 8 others
|
| Citations |
Not available
|
| Other Citations |
Jalal and 11 others v. Kapri Khan and another PLD 2008 Kar. 369,
Rahim Tahir v. Ahmed Jan and 2 others PLD 2007 SC 423,
Nabi Bux and 6 others v. Ghulam Muhammad and others PLD 2008 Kar. 518,
Maqsood Ahmed Qureshi v. Muhammad Azam Ali Siddiqui and 8 others PLD 2009 Kar. 65,
Iftikhar Ahmad v. Zulfiqar Ali and 3 others PLD 2008 Lah. 59,
Mst. Jallan v. Muhammad Riaz and others PLD 2003 SC 644,
Muhammad Mansha Kausar v. Muhammad Asghar and others 2003 SCMR 477,
Muhammad Shafi v. Muhammad Raza and another 2008 SCMR 329,
Mst. Saira Bibi v. Muhammad Asif and others 2009 SCMR 946,
Muhammad Aslam v. Sabir Hussain and others 2009 SCMR 985
|
| Laws Involved |
Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005),
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
|
| Sections |
S. 3,
S.417(2-A)
|