Case in which hadd shall not be enforced

Citation Name : 2019 PCrLJN 77 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD JAVAID
Side Opponent : State
S. 497---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Act (XI of 1985), Ss. 10, 11 & 19---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Case in which hadd shall not be enforced---Scope---Accused was charged for ABDUCTION and forcibly committing the act of zina---Medical report showed that alleged abductee was subjected to sexual intercourse but no mark of violence had been shown on her body---Prima facie, alleged abductee was a consenting party in the act of sexual intercourse---Authenticity of medical report or forcible ABDUCTION could only be seen by Trial Court after recording evidence---Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 2039 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : WAQAR A. SHAMSI
Side Opponent : State
Ss. 365-A & 302(b)---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7(e)---Kidnapping for ransom, qatl-i-amd, act of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Conviction under S. 302(b), P.P.C maintained, while that under S. 365-A, P.P.C. and S. 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 set aside---Prosecution was able to constitute a chain of circumstances, link by link, through last seen evidence, occupation of premises, recovery of electric wire and ropes, employed by the accused and co-accused to cause death of deceased confirmed as asphyxial and, thus argument that there was no evidence for a guilty verdict did not hold much water---Family of deceased had no axe to grind against the accused, who was deceased's best friend, and therefore there was no reason to swap him with the real offender---Exclusive knowledge of accused regarding different aspects of the occurrence was a piece of evidence inexorably pointing upon his culpability---Set of circumstances of the present case equally pointed towards the guilt of co-accused as well---Accused and co-accused could not escape the consequences of deceased's murder on the strength of bald denials, supported by inconsequential defence---Convictions as well as sentences of accused and co-accused for the offence of qatl-i-amd [section 302 (b), P.P.C.] were maintained, however, no evidence was available on record to frame them with the charge of ABDUCTION for ransom, even obliquely, as there was no proof that communication by the anonymous caller demanding ransom was actually made by the accused and co-accused---Phone data provided was without positive proof about the caller or subscriber of cell phone handset as the calls were made, according to prosecution's own case, from a public calling booth---Furthermore ransom was never transacted, therefore, prosecution's case to the extent of ABDUCTION for ransom was not established---Accused and co-accused were acquitted from the charges under S. 365-A, P.P.C. and S. 7(e) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, while their convictions and sentences under S. 302(b), P.P.C. were maintained---Appeals were allowed accordingly.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 1330 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD AZAD
Side Opponent : State
Ss. 302(b) & 365-A---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or ABDUCTION for extorting property, valuable security etc., acts of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Disclosure by accused on the basis of his exclusive knowledge led to the discovery of the corpse of the abducted-minor---Given the briefest timeframe, to the exclusion of any other hypothesis, it could be safely inferred, that accused alone knew what befell upon the child and where he was dumped---Cell phone data confirmed conversation between the accused and the complainant, and there was hardly any time or occasion for the family of victim to concoct or cook up a story on suspicions or consultations---Investigative conclusions also pointed towards the accused---Complainant and his brother, with no axe to grind, were cross examined at length, but no discrepancies were found in their statements---No reason existed to suspect accused's identity or entertain theory of substitution---Accused's guilt was proved to the hilt on the basis of chain of circumstances, well synchronized with one another and intrinsically confidence inspiring---Accused had been rightly convicted and sentenced to death given the brutality inflicted upon the abducted-child---Appeal was dismissed accordingly.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 1317 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : KHURRAM
Side Opponent : State
Ss. 302(b), 365-A & 201---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or ABDUCTION for extorting property, valuable security etc., causing disappearance of evidence of offence---Reappraisal of evidence---Last seen evidence---Two alleged witnesses, with one voice, claimed to have last seen the complainant's son/deceased in accused's company---Said witnesses gave the date of encounter, while conspicuously omitting the point of time---Said witnesses were once again together on a subsequent date when they visited the complainant and upon inquiry they shared information about seeing the deceased with the accused---Such story, which captured all the details and was narrated at a thoroughfare in a crowded city, at an unspecified point of time was hard to buy---Reason for presence of said witnesses with the complainant was vague and per chance---Such script of prosecution was far from being plausible---Acquittal of the identically placed co-accused added to the doubts regarding statement of said witnesses---Appeal was allowed in circumstances and accused was acquitted of the charge.