IRFAN alias IMRAN alias KADU vs State S — 2022 PCrLJ 1268 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

IRFAN alias IMRAN alias KADU VS State S. 376---Rape---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Medical evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing rape with the mentally retarded daughter of the complainant---According to prosecution version was that occurrence took place at 3:00 p.m.---Medical Officer medically examined the victim on next day at 4:20 p.m.---Important aspect of the case was that at the time of medical examination of the victim, the Medical Officer obtained vaginal swabs, which were dispatched to the Centre for Applied Molecular Biology Laboratory along with her Shalwar, blood samples of the victim and the accused---DNA report available on record suggested that sperm fractions in vaginal swabs and stains on the shalwar did not match with the profile of the accused rather sperm fractions were of some unknown person---DNA profile revealed that sperm fractions obtained from vaginal swabs and stains on the shalwar of the prosecutrix were of one unknown male, which meant that although victim was subjected to sexual assault by some unknown person but it was not the accused---When it was observed by the Forensic Scientist that the sperm fraction extracted from vaginal swabs was identical to the sperm fraction extracted from the stains available on shalwar of the victim, which were of some other person rather than that of the accused, it shall prove fatal to the prosecution case---In the present case best possible evidence available was DNA test, which did not support the prosecution version, rather it was sufficient to demolish the edifice of prosecution case---Although DNA report was exhibited in evidence and was also put to accused under S. 342, Cr.P.C. but trial judge did not utter a single word qua that report, either to accept it or discard the same, while pronouncing the impugned judgment of conviction---Such indifferent attitude of the Trial Court, which resulted in conviction of present accused, was in conflict with the fundamental norms of justice and right to fair trial as guaranteed under Art. 10-A of the Constitution---High Court observed that every court of law was obliged to consider entire evidence available on the record before pronouncing a judgment of conviction or acquittal---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances.

IRFAN alias IMRAN alias KADU vs State S — 2022 PCrLJ 1268 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ