| Case ID |
2329eb43-3244-4be4-9a27-5bbbdefc2281 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 83 of 2012 and Murder Ref |
| Decision Date |
Feb 14, 2017 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Islamabad High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of Rasool Bakhsh, acquitting him in the murder case. The court emphasized the lack of sufficient and concrete evidence against Rasool Bakhsh, noting that the prosecution's case was predominantly based on circumstantial evidence which did not conclusively establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The judges highlighted that the incriminating materials, such as the statements from witnesses and the recovery of certain items, were either insufficient or lacked corroboration necessary for a conviction. Consequently, the court directed that the trial proceedings against the proclaimed offenders be resumed to ensure that justice is comprehensively served. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' and ensuring that convictions are based on irrefutable evidence. The acquittal of Rasool Bakhsh serves as a testament to the court's diligence in scrutinizing the prosecution's case meticulously before delivering a verdict. |
| Summary |
In the pivotal case heard at the Islamabad High Court, Criminal Jail Appeal No. 83 of 2012 and Murder Reference No. 1 of 2013, the court rendered a significant decision on February 14, 2017, concerning the conviction of Rasool Bakhsh. The case revolved around serious charges under the Pakistan Penal Code of 1860, specifically sections 34, 201, 302, 392, and 460, which encompass joint criminal liability, culpable homicide, wrongful confinement, theft of property, and other related offenses. The hearing dates spanned from May 9 to November 15, 2016, during which the court meticulously examined the evidence presented.
The prosecution's case primarily relied on circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies and the recovery of items such as a .30 bore pistol and two magazines from the accused. Key witnesses like PW-8 Mehrban Shah and PW-9 Shahid provided statements detailing the discovery of the deceased and the events leading up to the incident. However, the defense, represented by Basharat Ullah Khan, contended that the evidence was insufficient, lacking direct links to definitively prove Rasool Bakhsh's involvement in the murders.
The judges, including Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, and Justice Rasool Bakhsh, emphasized the necessity for the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard that they found unmet in this instance. They pointed out that while circumstantial evidence can be compelling, it must form an unbroken chain directly connecting the accused to the crime, which was not satisfactorily demonstrated. The court also referenced other pertinent cases such as Muhammad Saleem v. Shabbir Ahmed and others (2016 SCMR 1605 rel.) and Azeem Khan and another v. Mujahid Khan and others (2016 SCMR 274 rel.) to support their decision, highlighting the importance of reliable and corroborative evidence in criminal convictions.
Furthermore, the court addressed procedural aspects, noting the absence of proactive measures to secure the presence of proclaimed offenders during the trial and the lack of proceedings against their sureties, which could have strengthened the prosecution's position. The defense successfully argued that the mere presence of the accused on a flight with the principal accused was insufficient to establish participation in the crime, especially without substantiated evidence linking Rasool Bakhsh to the actual act of murder.
Ultimately, the decision to acquit Rasool Bakhsh underscores the judiciary's unwavering commitment to ensuring that convictions are founded on robust and incontrovertible evidence. By setting aside the conviction, the court reinforced the foundational legal principle that an individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty, mandating that the burden of proof lies firmly with the prosecution. This ruling not only serves justice in this specific case but also sets a precedent for the rigorous evaluation of evidence in future cases, ensuring that the rights of the accused are meticulously protected within the legal framework. |
| Court |
Islamabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
The State,
Rasool Bakhsh
|
| Judges |
SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI,
JUSTICE MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI,
JUSTICE RASOOL BAKHSH
|
| Lawyers |
Basharat Ullah Khan,
Ms. Hadia Aziz,
Syed Feroz Shah
|
| Petitioners |
Basharat Ullah Khan
|
| Respondents |
Ms. Hadia Aziz,
Syed Feroz Shah on behalf of Legal heirs of both deceased
|
| Citations |
2017 SLD 2727,
2017 PCRLJ 1351
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Saleem v. Shabbir Ahmed and others 2016 SCMR 1605 rel.,
Azeem Khan and another v. Mujahid Khan and others 2016 SCMR 274 rel.,
Muhammad Akram v. The State 2009 SCMR 230 rel.
|
| Laws Involved |
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
|
| Sections |
34,
201,
302,
392,
460
|