Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 486 2026 SLD 486 = 2026 PCRLJ 176
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. (L) 03 of 2024, decided on 28th August, 2025.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Muhammad Najam-ud-Din Mengal, JJ
Aftab Ahmed Lone for Appellant. Younas Mengal, Additional P.G. for the State. Ayub Khan Sherani for the Complainant.

SAIF-UR-REHMAN---Appellant

VERSUS

The STATE---Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 377

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 377---Unnatural offence---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt--Contradictory statements of witnesses---Accused was charged for committing sodomy with the minor son of complainant---Record reflected that the prosecution in order to substantiate the charge had produced the evidence of nine witnesses---Minute security of all the said witnesses transpired that the crime was not directly witnessed by them rather all the witnesses were present either in their houses or at the work place, hence the statements of said witnesses were hearsay evidence, which otherwise was not helpful to the case of prosecution---Victim though described the whole story by stating that on 25th October 2023 he was sitting in front of his house, in the meanwhile, at about 08:45 a.m. accused came there and asked him to watch his house, as he intended to attend a funeral ceremony, then took him to his house, where the accused committed unnatural offence with him---While contrary to the same, the complainant deposed in his Court statement that on the day of incident at about 08:45 a.m. he was present at his field, as such, received a telephone call, whereby he was informed about the occurrence---During the course of crossexamination, the victim deposed that his father was a rickshaw driver on those days, whereas the complainant stated that he was working in his cultivated land on the day of incident---Victim stated that on the said date another person namely A came to his house along with his father, while said witness A negated narration of victim in his Court statement, whereby he deposed that he was present in his house, on listening of hue and cry, he promptly reached to the house of complainant, where on his query, the victim disclosed to him that accused committed sodomy with him and he was bleeding and his shalwar was also blood stained---Thus, such contradictory statement of a star witness created serious dents in the case of prosecution---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 377---Unnatural offence---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt--Medical evidence not supporting the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register