NAVEED ASGHAR vs State Conviction — 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Conviction---Conjectures and probabilities---Not the substitute of proof---In criminal cases finding of guilt against an accused person could not be based merely on the high probabilities that may be inferred from evidence in a given case---Accused person could not be convicted on the basis of mere "suspicion" or "probability" unless and until the charge against him was "proved beyond reasonable doubt"---Finding as regards guilt should be rested surely and firmly on the evidence produced in the case and the plain inferences of guilt that may irresistibly be drawn from that evidence---Mere conjectures and probabilities could not take the place of proof---If a case was decided merely on high probabilities regarding the existence or nonexistence of a fact to prove the guilt of a person, the golden rule of giving "benefit of doubt" to an accused person, which was a dominant feature of the administration of criminal justice would be reduced to a naught. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of the bloodstained knives (churri) on the alleged pointation of accused persons---Such recovery, without a positive forensic report matching the blood found thereon with that of the deceased, could not be considered as a substantive or corroborative piece of evidence against the accused persons to connect them with the commission of offence---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Chance witness, evidence of---Explanation given by the chance witness, who saw the accused persons entering the house of the deceased, was that he happened to pass by in front of the house of the deceased, as he was going from his house to a nearby village for condolence on the death of the father of a person---However, said witness did not mention the name of the person on whose father's death he was going for condolence; nor could he tell the name of the late person on whose death he was going for condolence---Further, his assertion of going for condolence at such odd hours, i.e., about 08:30 p.m., on a winter-night of the month of January did not fit in the customary time of visiting people for condolence on death of someone, in rural areas: people usually made such visits during daytime---Explanation of chance witness of being present before the house of the deceased, at the relevant time was thus found far less than being satisfactory one, and therefore, his testimony could be discarded on such ground alone---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Material improvements made by a witness in his statement---Effect---Witness who claimed to have seen the accused persons entering the house of the deceased stated to the investigation officer in his statement recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. that due to darkness he could not recognize the accused persons when he saw them standing at the door of the house of the deceased; but in his statement in court he said that the accused persons were those whom he saw at the door of the deceased---Said witness also stated that there was light, not darkness, at the door of the house of the deceased at that time---Such improvement made by the witness was very glaring and material---Said witness admitted in his cross-examination that he had not mentioned any identifying features, like age, height, colour of complexion etc., of the persons in his statement to the investigating officer---If the witness had really seen and recognized the persons standing at the door of the deceased, he would definitely have described their identifiable features to the investigating officer, and had he described such recognizable features of those persons, the investigating officer would have conducted the test identification of the accused persons on their arrest in the case---Such deliberate and dishonest improvement made by the witness made him unreliable---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Chance witness, evidence of---Scope---Chance witness was witness who in view of his place of residence or occupation and in the ordinary course of events was not supposed to be present at the place of the occurrence but claimed to be there by chance---Testimony of such witness required cautious scrutiny and was not accepted unless he gave satisfactory explanation of his presence at or near the place of the occurrence at the relevant time. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Circumstantial evidence---Approach to determine sufficiency of circumstantial evidence stated. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Witness---Material improvements made by a witness in his statement---Effect---Deliberate and dishonest improvements made by a witness in his statement to strengthen the prosecution case cast serious doubts on his veracity, and made him untrustworthy and unreliable---Relying on the testimony of such witness was quite unsafe, even on facts deposed by him other than those improvements unless it received corroboration from some other independent piece of reliable evidence. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Heinous nature of crime---Nature of the crime should not influence the mind of the judge---Duty of the court was to assess the probative value (weight) of every piece of evidence available on record in accordance with the settled principles of appreciation of evidence, in a dispassionate, systematic and structured manner without being influenced by the nature of the allegations. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of motorcycle allegedly used for reaching the place of occurrence---No specification of the motorcycle, i.e., its make, colour, engine power, or registration number was mentioned in the FIR, therefore, it could not be said with certainty that it was the motorcycle that the chance witness saw with the persons outside the house of the deceased and was mentioned in the FIR---Statement of the investigating officer that the seat-cover of the recovered motorcycle was bloodstained and such fact suggested that it was the same motorcycle that was used in the crime was not found confidence inspiring; had the seat-cover of the motorcycle been really bloodstained, the investigating officer would have sent the same for examination by the Chemical Examiner for ascertaining whether the bloodstain was that of human blood and whether that bloodstain matched with the blood of any of the deceased persons or the accused persons---In absence of the reports of the Chemical Examiner and the Serologist on these facts, the assertion of the investigating officer as to use of the said motorcycle in commission of the crime carried no legal worth---Failure on part of the investigating officer to ascertain registration number and name of the registered owner of the motorcycle was also fatal to his assertion that the recovered motorcycle belonged to one of the accused persons---Non-preparation of the site-map of the place of recovery of motorcycle added further suspicion to the alleged recovery of the motorcycle from the house of one of the accused persons---Recovery of the motorcycle, in view of the said omissions made by the investigating officer, was found completely deficient as an incriminatory piece of circumstantial evidence to connect the accused persons with the commission of the offence---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Recovery---Recovery of weapon of offence--- Corroborative evidence---Scope---Recovery of weapon of offence was only a corroborative piece of evidence; and in absence of substantive evidence, it was not considered sufficient to hold the accused person guilty of the offence charged---When substantive evidence failed to connect the accused person with the commission of offence or was disbelieved, corroborative evidence was of no help to the prosecution as the corroborative evidence could not by itself prove the prosecution case. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of stolen items on the alleged pointation of accused persons---Investigating officer deposed that during the inspection of the place of occurrence he found empty boxes of jewellery scattered there which indicated the commission of offence of robbery---Prosecution story of interrogation of the accused persons at the place of their arrest (a snooker club) and then leading of the accused persons from the very place of their arrest to the recoveries of the alleged stolen property appeared to be intrinsically doubtful: it did not even fit in with the ordinary human conduct---Accused persons who, as per the prosecution story, were enjoying play snooker in a snooker club, admitted the commission of offence that may entail death penalty forthwith on their arrest, and not only admitted the commission of offence but also cooperated well to lead to the recovery of the stolen property then and there---Such story was very hard to believe for a prudent person---Non-mentioning the alleged fact of finding any scattered jewellery boxes at the place of occurrence in the FIR shook the foundation of the prosecution story---Investigating officer also stated in his examination-in-chief that a crime scene expert was summoned at the spot, who took photographs of the dead bodies and the place of occurrence---All said photographs were available on record but in none of them were there any scattered empty jewellery boxes---Said photographs, tendered in evidence by the prosecution itself, completely negated the alleged fact of finding scattered empty jewellery boxes at the place of occurrence---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 374, 375, 376 & 423---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 9, 10A & 14---Murder reference sent by the Trial Court to the High Court for confirmation of death sentence---Scope---Duty cast on the High Court in deciding a murder reference under S.374, Cr.P.C. was a heavy one and could only be discharged once the entire evidence was reappraised to fully exhaust all the points having a bearing upon the guilt or innocence of the convicted person---High Court, in dealing with a murder reference, was not only to see whether the order passed by the Trial Court was correct, but to examine the case for itself and even direct a further enquiry or the taking of additional evidence if the Court considered it desirable in order to ascertain the guilt or the innocence of the convicted person---Scope of a murder reference and principles in relation thereto stated. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State art. 10-a---Right to fair trial---Scope---Principles of fair trial, guaranteed as a Fundamental Right under art. 10-a of the Constitution, were to be read as an integral part of every sub-constitutional legislative instrument that dealt with determination of civil rights and obligations of, or criminal charge against, any person. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Medical evidence---Scope---Medical evidence was in the nature of supporting, confirmatory or explanatory of the direct or circumstantial evidence, and was not "corroborative evidence" in the sense the term was used in legal parlance for a piece of evidence that itself also had some probative force to connect the accused person with the commission of offence---Medical evidence by itself did not throw any light on the identity of the offender---Such evidence may confirm the available substantive evidence with regard to certain facts including seat of the injury, nature of the injury, cause of the death, kind of the weapon used in the occurrence, duration between the injuries and the death, and presence of an injured witness or the injured accused at the place of occurrence, but it did not connect the accused with the commission of the offence---Medical evidence could not constitute corroboration for proving involvement of the accused person in the commission of offence, as it did not establish the identity of the accused person. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Circumstantial evidence---Standard of care required for relying on circumstantial evidence stated. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd , robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of stolen items on the alleged pointation of accused persons---Investigating officer neither got the allegedly stolen laptop and cameras identified from the surviving daughters of the deceased, nor got done forensic audit of these articles from the expert concerned who may have retrieved data therefrom indicating the persons who were in use of these cameras and laptop---Such failure on part of the investigating officer made the recovery of said articles, even if presumed to have been effected from the accused persons, useless for the purpose of crafting any link in the chain of circumstantial evidence against the accused persons to connect them with the commission of offences of robbery and murders---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State S. 392---Robbery---Recovery of alleged stolen property in absence of prior description---Effect---In absence of any description of the stolen property given in the FIR, or in the supplementary statement of the complainant or any witness recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C., prior to the alleged recovery, it could not be said with certainty the recovered property was that which was allegedly stolen. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of the bloodstained weapons of offence on the alleged pointation of accused persons---Both the witnesses associated during recovery proceedings were close relatives of the complainant and astonishingly they reached the police station at the time when the investigating officer planned to make a raid for arrest of the accused persons and also when the accused persons were ready to cooperate for making recoveries during investigation---Prosecution story became further doubtful as particulars of said witnesses were written on the recovery-memos in handwriting patently different from all other writings thereon; it indicated that the particulars of the witnesses were added and their signatures obtained subsequently on the already prepared recovery memos---As per version of the investigating officer, there were 7/8 shops and two villages near the place of alleged recoveries, but no person from those nearby shops and villages was associated in the recovery-proceedings---Although it was a fact that the persons from the general public usually did not come forward to be witness to such police proceedings, but the assertion of the investigating officer that no person of the locality other than the said witnesses was there to see the proceedings that allegedly continued for about three hours of the day made the proceedings further doubtful---Story of wrapping up bloodstained knives, the alleged weapons of offence and gloves into polythene shopper bags and then burying them in the ground close to a water stream by the offenders, for a future recovery therefrom, instead of throwing them into that water stream or a nearby river also did not appeal to a prudent mind---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, house trespass, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Recovery of mobile phones belonging to the deceased persons on the alleged pointation of accused persons---Clear contradiction existed in the oral stance of the investigation officer and the proceedings of recovery reduced into writing by him in the recovery memos, which made the recoveries of mobile phones doubtful---Furthermore it was also not consistent with the normal human conduct that the offenders would have taken the mobiles phones of some of the deceased persons, and had left the mobile phone of one of the deceased laying it on a conspicuous place, i.e., on a table beside the dead body of the said deceased---Non-mentioning the theft of the mobile phones of the deceased persons in the FIR or in the supplementary statement of the complainant, non-joining in investigation the brothers of the accused persons who had allegedly brought the mobile phones to the investigating officer, and not bringing on record their names and the details as to the place from where they got the said mobile phones, all these omissions, also made the alleged recoveries unreliable---Prosecution had failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to establish conclusively the guilt of the accused persons in a manner that could rule out every hypothesis inconsistent with their innocence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and the accused persons were acquitted of the charges against them. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Prosecution----Standard of proof--- Scope--- Benefit of doubt---Scope---Prosecution was under the obligation to prove its case against the accused person at the standard of proof required in criminal cases, namely, beyond reasonable doubt standard, and could not be said to have discharged this obligation by producing evidence that merely met the preponderance of probability standard applied in civil cases---If the prosecution failed to discharge its said obligation and there remained a reasonable doubt, not an imaginary or artificial doubt, as to the guilt of the accused person, the benefit of that doubt was to be given to the accused person as of right, not as of concession. Citation Name: 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NAVEED ASGHAR VS State Presumption of innocence of accused---Scope---Accused person was presumed to be innocent till the time he was proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and this presumption of his innocence continued until the prosecution succeeded in proving the charge against him beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of legally admissible, confidence inspiring, trustworthy and reliable evidence.

NAVEED ASGHAR vs State Conviction — 2021 PLD 600 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 PLD