Concurrent findings of fact. Rule as to non-interference in concurrent finding of fact does not apply to criminal cases. (SC) PLD 1967 SC 334 Samual v. Samual and the State. Supreme Court in appeal does not interfere unless findings are perverse. (SC) PLJ 1977 SC 444. M. Ashraf etc.
(Note: In PLD 1971 SC 125 Mukhtar Ali, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellant in spite of the concurrent findings of all the Courts below holding the appellant guilty under section 411, P.P.C).
Concurrent finding of Courts below based on abundance evidence, held, High Court rightly refused to interfere. (SC) 1970 SCMR 877 Mati-ur Rehman.
Findings of facts by lower appellate Court not based on evidence is not to be accepted as final. (FC) 1969 SCMR 621 Hassu v. The Crown.
Summary disposal of revision petition not approved by the Supreme Court. It is too narrow a view about the scope of the revision that when the Courts below have given concurrent findings, High Court can only interfere if any illegality or irregularity in mode of trial had occurred. (SC) NLR 1983 Cr. 5. Kamal Din.
Concurrent Judgments of Magistrate & Sessions Judge set aside for offence u/S. 325, PPC on the ground that the evidence was not fit for sustaining conviction. NLR 1985 Cr. 579. Hazart Shah.
Concurrent findings of guilt by Court below is of no consequence when cardinal principles requiring consideration for and against the prosecution are ignored. 1979 SCMR 214. Muhammad Sadiq v. Muhammad Sarwar.
Concurrent findings of guilty set aside by Supreme Court because evidence in favour of accused ignored, while evidence against prosecution also considered. PLJ 1981 SC 302. Nawaz Ali.
Concurrent findings are vitiated when both Courts below ignore all evidence going against prosecution. 1981 SCMR 132 Nawaz Ali.
Concurrent findings of Courts below upset by Supreme Court in a criminal case u/S. 447, PPC as case of no evidence. PLJ 1981 SC 428. Abdur Rehman.
Case of no evidence, Supreme Court granted leave to appeal against concurrent findings of two Courts below. NLR 1984 Cr. 713. Abdul Rehman.
High Court will be slow in disturbing finding of fact and shall give proper weight to view of trial judge as to creditability of witnesses. (SC) 1970 SCMR 857 Din Muhammad.
Concurrent finding of facts by two lower Courts can be interfered with by High Court only when it is in the interest of justice. 1975 P.Cr. LJ 75 Noor Ahmed v. Jamil Ahmed etc.
Concurrent findings of facts of Courts below are not to be interfered by High Courts in revision unless question of law is involved or findings of fact amount to miscarriage of justice. No interference is called for when simple issues are supported by complicated evidence. PLD 1975 Kar. 92; PLJ 1974 Cr.C. (Kar) 579 Abdul Rashid.
Concurrent findings of Courts below are not to be interfered with unless there is misreading of evidence or non-consideration of important piece of evidence. 1996 SCMR. 1553 Abdul Khaliq.