| Case ID |
3a102209-5ceb-434b-ab70-4857ce78c5b1 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Crl. As. Nos. 19-J and 20-J of 2017 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 31, 2019 |
| Hearing Date |
Jan 31, 2019 |
| Decision |
The court has acquitted Muhammad Usman and Muhammad Faraz of the charges brought against them, citing insufficient evidence to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The identification of the accused in torchlight was deemed unreliable, and the prosecution failed to provide compelling medical evidence linking the defendants to the crime. Consequently, the benefit of the doubt was extended to the defendants, leading to their immediate release from custody pending any other criminal proceedings that may involve them. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Muhammad Usman and Another vs State etc., heard at the Lahore High Court and decided on January 31, 2019, the appellants Muhammad Usman and Muhammad Faraz were acquitted of charges under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. The case revolved around the disputed identification of the accused in the dark, where the appellants were alleged to have committed a heinous crime involving the murder of Mr. Rashid alias Sunni. The prosecution's key evidence was the torchlight identification by eyewitnesses, a method previously regarded as unreliable and insufficient for establishing guilt beyond plausible doubt. Medical evidence presented during the trial also failed to conclusively link the defendants to the crime, further weakening the prosecution's case. Notably, the defense highlighted procedural lapses, including delays in the post-mortem examination and questionable witness testimonies, casting significant doubts on the validity of the prosecution's narrative. Citing precedents such as The State v. Hakim Ali and others (1996 PCr.LJ 231) and Muhammad Akram v. The State (2009 SCMR 230), the court emphasized the principle that in cases of reasonable doubt, the benefit must invariably favor the accused. Ultimately, the Lahore High Court found the evidence presented by the prosecution to be fraught with inconsistencies and insufficient in corroborating the allegations against the appellants. As a result, Muhammad Usman and Muhammad Faraz were granted acquittal, excusing them from any further captivity unless implicated in other criminal proceedings. This case underscores the critical importance of reliable identification processes and stringent evidentiary standards within the judicial system, ensuring that justice is rightly served through meticulous scrutiny of all presented evidence. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Punjab Forensic Agency, Lahore
|
| Judges |
Anwaarul Haq Pannu
|
| Lawyers |
Afzar Saeed Jillani,
Shahid Fareed
|
| Petitioners |
Muhammad Usman and Another
|
| Respondents |
State etc.
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 1849,
2021 PLJ 623
|
| Other Citations |
The State v. Hakim Ali and 3 others (1996 PCr.LJ 231),
Muhammad and others v. The State (1968 PCr.LJ 590),
Suwali v. The State (1982 PCr.LJ 808),
The State v. Fazal Muhammad and another (1970 PCr.LJ 633),
Muhammad Ilyas v. Muhammad Abid alias Billa and others (2014 SCMR 1698),
Faqeer Muhammad v. Shahbaz Ali and others (2016 SCMR 1441),
Muhammad Ilyas v. Muhammad Abid alias Billa and others (2017 SCMR 54),
Muhammad Akram v. The State (2009 SCMR 230),
Tariq Pervaiz v. The State (1995 SCMR 1345)
|
| Laws Involved |
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
|
| Sections |
302(b)
|