Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or ABDUCTION for extorting property, valuable security etc.

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---Witness summoned in midst of trial---Scope---Dead body was recovered from a house, statedly owned by witness "G", who was summoned by Trial Court to establish that the house was rented to the accused and that it was the same place wherefrom the dead body was recovered---Such exercise was taken in the midst of the trial---While a Court had ample power to send for witnesses for just decision of the case, nonetheless, power of such amplitude must be exercised with circumspection without disturbing the adversarial balance of the trial---No statement of witness "G" was recorded during the investigation---Similarly there was no proof of ownership or tenancy as admitted by said witness---Such a sudden move by the trial court to summon witness "G" and reliance thereon to the detriment of the accused, could not be viewed as conscionable---Another reason to discard the statement of said witness was that according to him the house was jointly occupied by the accused including those co-accused acquitted form the charge---Advance stage of putrefaction of the dead body, with elimination of facial features, without DNA analysis, represented a real issue regarding the identity of the corpse---Moreover said corpse was recovered in pursuance of a recorded joint disclosure of accused and co-accused, , one by one, but in the same session---Appeal was allowed in circumstances and accused was acquitted of the charge.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 1297 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : WAZIR
Side Opponent : State
S. 365-A--- Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7(e)---Kidnapping or ABDUCTION for extorting property, valuable security etc., act of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Case based on confessional statement of accused---Once prosecution opted to rely upon a confessional statement of an accused to his detriment it must come forward with the disclosure above all suspicions and taints---Occurrence took place in February 2002, whereas the appellant statedly made his confessional statement months later on 27-6-2002---Confessional statement spreading over four hand written pages was strangely elaborate and exhaustive; it was more of an elaborative statement to cater for the needs of the prosecution than a declaration of guilt by a remorseful or repentant offender---Argument that such a detailed narrative could neither be voluntary nor spontaneous was not entirely without substance---Confessional statement of accused could not be favourably received without being imprudent for another reason; it had been disbelieved qua eight co-accused persons---Furthermore findings recorded by the medical officer with regard to cause of death were not in line with the details purportedly furnished by the accused--- Prosecution case against the appellant was not free from doubt and thus it would be un-safe to maintain his conviction---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted of the charge.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 1224 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : IFTIKHAR AHMAD
Side Opponent : State
Ss. 302(b) & 365-A---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7(e)---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or ABDUCTION for extorting property, valuable security etc., acts of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---No DNA identification of swabs carried out---Prosecution's failure to carry out DNA profile generation of rectal and vaginal swabs was a most grievous lapse that in retrospect made out a case to revisit the sentence of accused---Death penalty awarded to accused on all counts was altered to imprisonment for life on each count---Appeal was allowed accordingly.