| Case ID |
1492eaeb-b80d-47f1-aba4-7d2ad98593d5 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Jail Petition No. 120 of 2017 and Cr. Petition No. |
| Decision Date |
May 16, 2024 |
| Hearing Date |
May 16, 2024 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled in favor of Muhammad Hassan, converting his jail petition into an appeal and acquitting him of the charges related to Qatl-i-amd (murder). The court found significant discrepancies in the prosecution's case, including a substantial delay in the filing of the FIR, which cast doubt on the integrity of the evidence presented. The court emphasized that the prosecution's witnesses were deemed 'chance witnesses' without solid justification for their presence at the crime scene. The judgment underscores the principle that any doubt in the prosecution's case should benefit the accused, leading to the conclusion that the evidence was insufficient to uphold the conviction. As a result, both the trial court's and the Lahore High Court's decisions were set aside, and the petitioner was ordered to be released if not required in any other case. |
| Summary |
In the case of Muhammad Hassan vs. The State, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed critical issues surrounding the conviction of the petitioner for Qatl-i-amd. The ruling highlighted the importance of timely FIR registration and the credibility of eyewitnesses. The court found that the FIR was lodged significantly late, over sixteen hours after the incident, raising questions about the reliability of the complainant's account. Key witnesses were classified as 'chance witnesses,' lacking a natural reason for their presence at the scene, which further weakened the prosecution's case. The judgment reiterated that any uncertainty in evidence must favor the accused, leading to Hassan's acquittal. This case emphasizes the judicial system's commitment to ensuring that convictions are based on reliable evidence and due process. Keywords such as 'Supreme Court of Pakistan,' 'Qatl-i-amd,' 'acquittal,' and 'eyewitness credibility' are essential for SEO optimization, reflecting current legal discussions and concerns. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Jamal Khan Mandokhail,
Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi,
Musarrat Hilali
|
| Lawyers |
Maqbool Ahmed Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner (in J.P. No. 120 of 2017),
Nemo for Petitioner (in Cr.P. No. 305-L of 2017),
Nemo for the Complainant (in J.P. No. 120 of 2017),
Mirza Abdul Majeed, Deputy Prosecutor General, Punjab for the State
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD HASSAN and another
|
| Respondents |
The STATE and others
|
| Citations |
2024 SLD 3857,
2024 SCMR 1427
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Imran v. The State 2020 SCMR 857,
Khadim Hussain v. The State 2010 SCMR 1090,
Muhammad Ashraf alias Acchu v. The State 2019 SCMR 652,
Hayatullah v. The State 2018 SCMR 2092,
Gul Dast Khan v. The State 2009 SCMR 431,
Sufyan Nawaz and another v. The State and others 2020 SCMR 192,
Abdul Jabbar and another v. The State 2019 SCMR 129,
Mst. Sughra Begum and another v. Qaiser Pervez and others 2015 SCMR 1142,
Muhammad Irshad v. Allah Ditta and others 2017 SCMR 142,
Tariq v. The State 2017 SCMR 1672,
Amir Muhammad Khan v. The State 2023 SCMR 566,
Aman Ullah and another v. The State and others 2023 SCMR 723,
Muhammad Hanif v. The State 2023 SCMR 2016,
Noor Elah v. Zafarul Haque PLD 1976 SC 557,
Allah Bakhsh v. The State PLD 1978 SC 171,
Tahir Khan v. The State 2011 SCMR 646,
Daniel Boyd (Muslim Name Saifullah) and another v. The State 1992 SCMR 196,
Mst. Asia Bibi v. The State and others PLD 2019 SC 64
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302(b)
|