| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1478 2026 SLD 1478 = 2026 PLJ 13 |
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
Crl. A. No. 531 & Crl. Rev. No. 189 of 2022, heard on 22.1.2025.
Presented By: Anwaarul Haq Pannun and Ali Zia Bajwa, JJ.
Mr. Muhammad Bilal Butt, Mr. Sana Ullah Khan, Ms. Samina Nighat and Ms. Rabia Kausar, Advocates for Appellants. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shahab, Deputy Prosecutor General for State. Malik Waqar Haider Awan and Mr. Amir Ahmad Awan, Advocates for Complainant. Date of hearing: 22.1.2025.
Crl. A. No. 531 & Crl. Rev. No. 189 of 2022, heard on 22.1.2025.
Presented By: Anwaarul Haq Pannun and Ali Zia Bajwa, JJ.
Mr. Muhammad Bilal Butt, Mr. Sana Ullah Khan, Ms. Samina Nighat and Ms. Rabia Kausar, Advocates for Appellants. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shahab, Deputy Prosecutor General for State. Malik Waqar Haider Awan and Mr. Amir Ahmad Awan, Advocates for Complainant. Date of hearing: 22.1.2025.
MUHAMMAD BILAL and another--Appellants
VERSUS
STATE etc.--Respondents
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 376(i)
PLJ 2026 Cr.C. (Note) 13 [Lahore High Court, Multan Bench] Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 376(i)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--DNA test report--Benefit of doubt--Testimony of alleged victim and lady doctor coupled with fact that during investigation conducted by CW-1, CW-3 and CW-4 accused/appellant was not found involved in commission of alleged offence as CW-1, Inspector deposed “Both parties joined investigation, it came in my investigation that accused did not forcibly commit rape with victim, however, prior to 8/9 months accused has illicit relation with victim”, CW-3 S.P. (Rtd.) deposed that “It is correct that during investigation, it came to my knowledge that on day of occurrence, a quarrel took place between uncle of victim and accused regarding turn of irrigation of miner--SP joined accused as well as victim in his investigation and also respectables of locality--As per my investigation, Occurrence did not take place on that day” and similarly, CW-4 DSP deposed that according to her investigation accused/appellant was found innocent, Court have no other option except to discard DNA test report tendered by prosecution in this case, which even otherwise cannot be treated as a primary evidence and can only be relied upon for purposes of corroboration--Prosecution’s case against appellant is highly doubtful--Held: It is well settled law that a single instance causing reasonable doubt in the-mind of Court entitles accused to benefit of same not as a matter of grace but as a matter of right--Appeal allowed. [Para 8 & 9] A & B 2023 SCMR 1698; 2009 SCMR 230 & 2014 SCMR 749. Judgment Anwaarul Haq Pannun, J.--Muhammad Bilal appellant faced trial in a Private Complaint under Section 376, PPC originally based on the narration of case F.I.R No. 136/2015 dated 13.05.2015 under Section 376, PPC, Police Station Raja Raam Tehsil Shujabad District Multan and through impugned judgment dated 07.05.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shujabad, he has been convicted under Section 376(i), PPC and sentenced to 10 years R.I with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-and in default of payment of fine…