The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the settled principle that interference with a judgment of acquittal is an exceptional course and can only be justified where the prosecution demonstrates glaring errors of law or fact showing that the acquittal is manifestly flawed and based on shocking conclusions.

In a seven-page judgment authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, the apex court observed that an acquittal carries a “double presumption of innocence” and that even a single circumstance creating reasonable doubt is sufficient to entitle an accused person to the benefit of that doubt.

“It is not mandatory that there must be numerous aftermaths that give rise to doubts to justify the benefit to the accused; rather, a single circumstance, if creating reasonable doubt, is enough to enable him a benefit,” the judgment said.

The ruling came in a case involving two accused persons who had been acquitted by a trial court. The Sindh High Court (SHC) later set aside the acquittal and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

The accused challenged the SHC’s order before the Supreme Court.

A division bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar held that where two sensible and judicious conclusions can reasonably be drawn from the evidence in a criminal case, the conclusion favouring acquittal must prevail.

The court observed that an appellate court hearing an appeal against acquittal should ordinarily refrain from interfering with the findings of the trial court because an acquittal strengthens the already existing presumption of innocence.