This is my mental experiment on this.
The O.P. states he would install a bigger cog on the left, and a bigger chainring on the right, resulting on a higher (faster) gear ration on right side and a lower(slower) gear ratio on the left.
Now, if the freewheel is installed normally (i.e. freewheeling on coast) then this happens:
If the freewheel is on the higher gear side, then it wants to move the bike faster, but the fixed side wants to go slower, so the transmission seizes.
If the freewheel is on the lower gear side, then the fixed side would move the bike faster than the freewheel side, so this side is actually coasting while the fixed side does the real work. Now you start trying to slow down, but the fixed side is always engaged, so the freewheel side never gets to be in use.
Second try: Somewhow the Freewheel is installed backwards, so it freewheels when you pedal forward, but engages on backpedalling:
If the freewheel is in the higher gear side: when you pedal forward the bike moves with the low gear ratio in the fixed side, the higher side freewheels because the hub rotates slower than the freewheel cog. Now stop pedalling, the frewheeling side engages so the tire tries to move the crankset and since it has higher ratio it tries to move the crankset slower than what the fixed side tries to move it, the transmission seizes.
If the freewheel is in the lower gear ratio side: When pedalling forward the fixed side dives the bike with the highest (fastest) ratio, the hub rotates forward faster than what the lower ratio tries to, the freewheel sees this as backpedaling (crankset rotating slower than the hub) so the transmision seizes.
I think that such arrangement woul not work, instead it would create potential catastrophic failure of the components due to them trying to drive one another with different angular speeds. However, I don't think the idea is to be dismissed, I think the goal of having one one ratio to accelerate and other to brake is to use two differently sized freewheels installed to engage in different directions. For this experiment I'd rather install a dual crankset with two identical chainrings.
Option 1: small freeweel engages while pedalling forward. The bike moves forward when pedalling normally using the higher ratio, then when trying to coast, the small cog starts freewheeling and the larger one engages, trying to move the crankset a little bit faster. When it does, it might result on a temporary engagement of the small freewheel that depends on an obscure relation between the angular position of the pawls inside the two ratchets, but as you are trying to slow down the pedals, the process repeats until you come to a stop (maybe a very jerky one). Whether or not this works whould depend on how much each freeweel can rotate before engaging (i.e. how long the ramps are) compared to the difference in gear ratios between them.
Option 2: big freeweel engages while pedalling forward. The bike moves moves forward using the lower ratio, the smaller cog is reverse-installed so ir freewheels. When trying to slow down the small freewheel engages, making the crankset rotate but slower than the ratio of the big freewheel demands, so it won't engage. This would give you different ratios for accelerating and braking, but would not satify the O.P. desire to have the lower ratio for braking.
Feel free to comment any corrections, I'd be happy to edit accordingly.