| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4888 2025 SLD 4888 = 2025 SCP 434 = 2026 SCMR 955 |
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1674 OF 2021 (On appeal against the judgment dated 09.06.2021 of the Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench (Dar ul Qaza) Swat passed in Crl. Appeal No.16-M/2020 with M. R. No.7 of 2020) and Crl. Appeal Nos.240-M/2016 and 42-M of 2020)
Mr. Justice Athar Minallah Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan Mr. Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan
Syed Kausar Ali Shah, Addl.AG KPK
Said-ur-Rehman and another … Petitioners
VERSUS
The State and another … Respondents
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 154,156(3),164,342, 382-B
Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860
Section: 302,147, 148,201,202,297
Law: Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Section: 38,40
Summary
The judgment acquitted appellants Said-ur-Rehman and Noor Rehmat of murder charges due to serious procedural and evidential deficiencies. The investigation was flawed, including illegal arrest before FIR registration, unreliable judicial confessions recorded under dubious circumstances, and weak physical evidence with delayed forensic analysis. The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting systemic issues in police investigation and prosecution. Consequently, convictions and sentences of death were overturned, and the appellants were released.
Core Points
- Criminal petition of appellants converted into appeal and allowed; convictions overturned.
- Serious lapses in police procedure, including failure to register FIR under section 154 Cr.P.C.
- Magistrate lacked authority to order inquiry under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before FIR registration.
- Arrest of appellants was illegal due to absence of lawful authority pre-FIR.
- Judicial confessions under section 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded in questionable circumstances and lacked corroboration.
- Physical evidence recovery was delayed and inconsistent with medical evidence.
- Forensic Science Laboratory report's reliability undermined by procedural lapses.
- Prosecution case was entirely circumstantial with contradictory witness testimony.
- Benefit of doubt extended to appellants leading to acquittal.
- Judgment criticized systemic flaws in criminal justice, police investigation, and prosecution.
Relevant Laws and Sections
| Law / Provision | Description |
|---|---|
| Section 154, Cr.P.C. | Registration of FIR upon cognizable offense |
| Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. | Magistrate's power to order investigation after FIR registration |
| Section 164, Cr.P.C. | Recording judicial confession with procedural safeguards |
| Section 342, Cr.P.C. | Statements of accused before trial |
| Section 302 PPC | Punishment for murder |
| Section 147, 148 PPC | Punishment for unlawful assembly and rioting |
| Section 201 PPC | Causing disappearance of evidence |
| Section 202 PPC | Intentional omission to give information of offense |
| Section 297 PPC | Injury to places of worship |
| Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. | Benefit of appeal provisions for accused |
| Article 38, Qanoon-e-Shahadat | Confession to police officer inadmissible |
| Article 40, Qanoon-e-Shahadat | Confession leading to discovery admissible |
JUDGMENT