| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3399 2025 SLD 3399 = 2025 SHC 242 |
Crl. Jail Appeal No.S-111 of 2024
Riazat Ali Sahar, J
Appellants: Ghulam Nabi, Azizullah, Sanaullah, Attaullah and Pathan alias Noor Muhammad, through Mr. Achar Khan Gabole, Advocate. Respondent: The State through, Mr. Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, Deputy Prosecutor Gneral.
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 365-B, 149, 506(2) ,148
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 103
Summary:
The appellants challenged a judgment convicting them under various sections of the Pakistan Penal Code related to an alleged attempt to abduct the complainant's daughter for marriage by force. The prosecution's case relied on eyewitness testimony alleging that the accused forcibly entered the complainant's house, threatened the family, and attempted to abduct the victim. However, significant procedural lapses, including failure to involve independent witnesses (mashirs), contradictions in witness testimonies, a delay in FIR lodging, and the complainant’s subsequent retraction of the accusations, created reasonable doubt. Considering these facts and settled legal principles, the appellate court acquitted the appellants, emphasizing that even a single reasonable doubt must benefit the accused.
Core Points:
- The appellants were convicted under Sections 365-B, 506(2), and 148 PPC read with Section 149 PPC.
- The case arose from an alleged forced attempt to abduct the complainant’s daughter for marriage.
- The FIR was delayed by one day, undermining its credibility.
- No independent or disinterested witnesses (mashirs) were associated despite the public nature of the incident.
- Material contradictions in the prosecution witnesses’ statements were noted.
- The Investigating Officer’s evidence did not strongly support the prosecution's claims.
- The complainant eventually filed an affidavit retracting the accusations against the accused.
- The court emphasized the benefit of doubt principle: even a single reasonable doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
- The conviction was overturned, and the accused were acquitted.
Law and Section:
| Law/Principle | Relevant Section(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Attempt to abduct with intent to compel marriage | Section 365-B PPC | Punishment for attempt to abduct a woman with intent of marriage, kidnapping, or forced labor. |
| Criminal conspiracy and common object | Section 149 PPC | Liability of every member of an unlawful assembly for the act done in prosecution of common object. |
| Threats and intimidation | Section 506(2) PPC | Punishment for criminal intimidation with threats to cause death or grievous hurt. |
| Rioting with a deadly weapon | Section 148 PPC | Punishment for rioting, armed with a deadly weapon. |
| Procedure for involving witnesses (Search and seizure) | Section 103 Cr.P.C | Requirement to associate two or more respectable inhabitants as witnesses during search and seizure. |
| Benefit of doubt principle | Case Law: Muhammad Hassan and Another v. The State [2024 SCMR 1427] | Even a single loophole or lacuna results in the benefit of doubt to the accused. |
J U D G M E N T