| Case ID |
ea71ef75-646b-423a-b208-785d25529016 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeal No. 259 of 2019 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 29, 2020 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 24, 2020 |
| Decision |
The appeal against conviction was accepted due to significant doubts cast upon the prosecution's case. The court found that the delay in filing the FIR, which was three days without a plausible explanation, undermined the credibility of the prosecution's evidence. Additionally, the prosecution failed to establish a motive for the crime and the ocular evidence provided by the witnesses was not corroborated by medical evidence. The court highlighted that the presence of the witnesses during the incident and the absence of any harm to them during the murder raised further doubts about the prosecution's claims. The case law cited indicated that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, which was not achieved in this instance. Hence, the appellant was acquitted of the charges under sections 302 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. |
| Summary |
In a notable case from the Balochistan High Court, the appeal against the conviction of Mandokhail was accepted, leading to his acquittal under sections 302(b) and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The court's decision hinged on the critical examination of the prosecution's evidence, which was found lacking in credibility due to a significant delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR) without a satisfactory explanation. This delay was deemed detrimental to the prosecution's case, raising doubts about the veracity of the claims made. The prosecution's failure to demonstrate a clear motive for the alleged murder further weakened its position. Witness testimonies, while present during the incident, did not align with the medical evidence presented, leading to questions about the reliability of the ocular accounts. The court referenced established legal principles that emphasize the necessity for the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, the acquittal of the appellant underscores the importance of procedural integrity and evidentiary sufficiency in criminal proceedings. |
| Court |
Balochistan High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD KAMRAN KHAN MULAKHAIL,
ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH
|
| Lawyers |
Tariq Ali Tahir for Appellant,
Muhammad Younas Mengal, Additional Prosecutor General for the State,
Iqbal Ahmed Kasi,
Nadeem Ahmed Sheikh for the Complainant
|
| Petitioners |
Mandokhail
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 1606,
2021 YLR 1696
|
| Other Citations |
Akhtar Ali v. The State 2008 SCMR 6,
Noor Muhammad v. The State 2010 SCMR 97,
Ahmed Yar v. The State 2005 YLR 747,
Dholu Khan v. The State 2002 PCr.LJ 690,
Muhammad Farooq v. The State 2006 SCMR 1707,
Hashim Qasim v. The State 2017 SCMR 986,
Hakmin Zafar v. The State 2017 YLR 232,
Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302(b),
34
|