Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 365-A

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7(e),6(1)

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: 161

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section: 129(g),143 & 144

Summary The Supreme Court acquitted Salamat Ali of kidnapping-for-ransom and ATA charges after finding the prosecution's case wholly unreliable. Key deficiencies included late and non-specific nomination, delayed and tainted identification, failure to record timely statements, absence of banking/telecom proof of ransom, doubtful recoveries, non-production of a material eyewitness, and no evidence of intent to terrorize—so the convictions and sentences by the trial court and the Lahore High Court were set aside and the appellant released. Core points FIR initially named unknown persons; appellant not nominated in early investigation. Appellant’s name surfaced later via disclosure by co-accused Ayesha Kanwal. Identification parade delayed eight days and conducted after the appellant had been shown to complainant; abductee did not take part; identification before court occurred after prior exposure. Abductee’s statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded belatedly; no convincing protection request was filed. Complainant refused to disclose the source of information for later nominations, undermining credibility. No documentary proof of the alleged Rs.1 crore banking transfer, and no call detail records to support ransom demands. Cash “recoveries” from appellant’s house occurred in two separate incidents (Rs.20,000 and Rs.30,000) with no identifying marks or linkage to the alleged ransom; possibility of planting suspected. A material eyewitness (Muhammad Zafar) was not produced; prosecution’s failure attracts adverse inference under Article 129(g) Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. No evidence the act was intended to create public terror or disturb public order; ATA section 7(e) inapplicable without intent under section 6(1) ATA. Cumulative defects amount to “no evidence” connecting appellant to the offence; convictions and sentences set aside and appellant acquitted. Police ordered to return Rs.50,000 recovered from appellant with bank interest (sum could not be linked to ransom). Court noted appellant suffered 16 years of detention and may pursue remedies for malicious prosecution if advised. Law and…