| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4589 2025 SLD 4589 = 2025 SCP 402 = 2026 SCMR 1146 |
Criminal Petitions No. 63-Q and 64-Q of 2024 (Against the judgment dated 29.10.2024 passed by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in Criminal Appeal No. 326/2022 and Cr. Revision No. 15 of 2022)
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail Justice Musarrat Hilali Justice Shakeel Ahmad
Osama (in Cr.PLA No. 63-Q/2024) Abdul Hanan (in Cr.PLA No. 64-Q/2024) ...........Petitioner
VERSUS
The State thr. Prosecutor General Balochistan (in Cr.PLA No. 63-Q/2024) Osama & others (in Cr.PLA No. 64-Q/2024) ........Respondent
Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973
Section: 185(3)
Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860
Section: 302,201,202
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 544-A,382-B,342,164
Summary
The petitioners challenged their life imprisonment conviction for the murder of Abdul Jabbar, primarily relying on circumstantial and last-seen evidence. The Court found the prosecution's evidence insufficient to establish a conclusive chain of events linking the accused to the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, citing delays in recovery reports, inconsistencies, and the absence of direct evidence. The accused was acquitted on benefit of doubt. However, a dissenting judge upheld the conviction, emphasizing the applicability of last-seen doctrine, recoveries, and co-accused confession despite investigation flaws.
Core Points
- Petitioners convicted for murder under Section 302/34 PPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with compensation under Section 544-A Cr.PC.
- FIR lodged on 24.09.2020 following disappearance of deceased who was last seen with accused on 22.09.2020.
- Accused admitted murder; dead body and crime weapon recovered after pointation.
- Prosecution case based on circumstantial evidence including last seen, recovery of blood-stained items, crime weapon, and snatched money.
- Postmortem report confirmed death by firearm injury; torture marks also present.
- Significant time gap between last seen and discovery of dead body; 12-day delay in disclosure report weakens prosecution case.
- Recovery of crime pistol and snatched money questioned due to delay and lack of custody record.
- Confessional statement of co-accused was retracted and considered weak as standalone evidence.
- Majority held that circumstances did not form a complete, unbroken chain, leading to acquittal on benefit of doubt.
- Dissenting judge upheld conviction, citing credible witness testimonies, last-seen theory, prompt recoveries, and voluntariness of co-accused confession.
- Enhancement of sentence request by complainant dismissed.
Law and Sections
| Law / Section | Description |
|---|---|
| Article 185(3) Constitution | Leave to appeal to Supreme Court under constitutional provision. |
| Section 302 PPC | Murder (inclusive of 302/34 PPC — murder by joint act). |
| Section 544-A Cr.PC | Compensation to legal heirs of deceased. |
| Section 382-B Cr.PC | Benefit of previous good conduct or similar benefit in sentence. |
| Section 342 Cr.PC | Recording statement of accused after prosecution evidence. |
| Section 164 Cr.PC | Recording confession by Judicial Magistrate. |
| Section 201 PPC | Causing disappearance of evidence or giving false info. |
| Section 202 PPC | Use of false information to screen offender or guilty person. |
| Article 40 QSO 1984 | Procedure and credibility of recovery and disclosure under Evidence Act. |
| Doctrine of Last Seen | Circumstantial evidence where accused last seen with deceased close to time of disappearance/death. |
JUDGMENT