| Case ID |
2e6e8c46-1959-473f-a0c4-098e585bec6f |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Confirmation Case No. 7 of 2007 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 19, 2012 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
In Confirmation Case No. 7 of 2007, the Sindh High Court, presided over by Justices Shahid Anwar Bajwa and Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, rendered a decision on July 19, 2012, acquitting the appellant, Abid alias Bagoo Bhatti, of the charges under Section 302(b) of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860) for Qatl-e-amd (murder). The court found that the prosecution's case was fraught with inconsistencies, including contradictions in witness statements regarding the number of live bullets and the handling of evidence, such as delays in sending the recovered firearm and bullets to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Additionally, discrepancies in the timeline of the appellant's arrest and the identification of the deceased further undermined the reliability of the prosecution's evidence. As a result, the appellate court determined that the prosecution had not met the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, thereby granting the appellant the benefit of doubt and ordering his immediate release. The court emphasized the principle that any doubt arising from the evidence supplied must favor the accused, ensuring the integrity of the judicial process and preventing wrongful convictions. |
| Summary |
In Confirmation Case No. 7 of 2007, adjudicated by the Sindh High Court and decided on July 19, 2012, the appellant, Abid alias Bagoo Bhatti, faced serious allegations under Section 302(b) of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860) for Qatl-e-amd (murder). The case, cited as 2012 SLD 2687 and 2012 YLR 2836, involved the tragic death of Muhammad Rafique, who was allegedly killed by the appellant using a single-barrel gun after a dispute over the hand of one of Rafique's daughters. The prosecution's case relied heavily on witness testimonies and the recovery of the firearm and ammunition from the scene. However, significant inconsistencies arose during the trial, including discrepancies in the number of live bullets reported by different witnesses and delays in the forensic analysis of the recovered evidence. The Forensic Science Laboratory's report indicated that five live cartridges were received 18 months after the incident, contrary to the three live cartridges initially reported by the witnesses. Furthermore, contradictions in the timeline of events, such as the conflicting statements regarding the time of the postmortem and the identification of the deceased, cast doubt on the reliability of the prosecution's narrative. The defense, represented by Miss Parveen Chachar, effectively highlighted these discrepancies, arguing that the evidence did not conclusively prove the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellate court, after meticulous examination of the evidence and testimonies, acknowledged the presence of reasonable doubts in the prosecution's case. Emphasizing the foundational legal principle that the benefit of doubt must always favor the accused, the court acquitted Abid alias Bagoo Bhatti, ordering his immediate release and rejecting the Confirmation Reference No. 7 of 2007. This landmark decision underscores the critical importance of consistent and timely evidence in criminal trials and reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rights of the accused. The case also referenced several precedents, including Imran Hussain v. Amar Arshad, Asim and another v. The State, Anwarul Hassan v. The State, Muhammad Mansha v. The State, Muhammad Irfan v. The State, and Misri and 3 others v. The State, which were instrumental in shaping the court's reasoning and ultimate verdict. The meticulous analysis of forensic delays, witness inconsistencies, and procedural lapses in this case serves as a pivotal reference for future litigations, emphasizing the necessity for unequivocal evidence in securing convictions. Moreover, the decision highlights the judiciary's role in meticulously scrutinizing prosecutorial evidence to prevent miscarriages of justice, thereby maintaining public trust in the legal system. This case stands as a testament to the rigorous standards of proof required in criminal law and the unwavering protection of individual rights against unfounded accusations. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Sindh High Court,
THE STATE,
Forensic Science Laboratory,
ABID alias BAGOO BHATTI,
Police Station Mangli
|
| Judges |
Shahid Anwar Bajwa,
Sadiq Hussain Bhatti
|
| Lawyers |
Miss Parveen Chachar,
Shahzado Saleem Nahiyoon, A.P.G.
|
| Petitioners |
ABID alias BAGOO BHATTI
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 2687,
2012 YLR 2836
|
| Other Citations |
Imran Hussain v. Amar Arshad 1997 SCMR 438,
Asim and another v. The State PLD 2004 Quetta 123,
Anwarul Hassan v. The State 1980 SCMR 649,
Muhammad Mansha v. The State PLD 1996 SC 229,
Muhammad Irfan v. The State PLD 2008 Kar. 182,
Misri and 3 others v. The State 1984 PCr.LJ 2832
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302(b)
|