Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA VS State S. 376---Rape---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused was charged for forcibly committing zina with the sister of the complainant---Complainant of the case appeared as witness, who though reiterated the contents of his fard-e-bayan but perusal of his statement revealed that the same was based on hearsay evidence, as the complainant did not witness the crime himself rather he uttered whatever was stated to him by the other witnesses and he mentioned the same in his fard-e-bayan---Complainant admitted in his cross-examination that there existed a landed/property dispute in between the accused (convict) and the maternal uncle of complainant and with the allegations of putting into fire the shop and attacking upon him, the accused had lodged FIR against him as well as against his maternal uncle---Complainant also admitted that the accused had also filed a complaint for registration of FIR against him with the allegations of abducting his daughter and also the accused sent notables of the area to his house to enquire about the whereabouts of his daughter---Said admissions of the complainant clearly established the fact that serious disputes were already existing in between the parties---Accused had already lodged FIR against complainant for attacking upon him and also putting into fire his shop and also he had submitted a complaint in police station for registration of another FIR against the accused with the allegations of abducting of his missing daughter---Under the said peculiar circumstances of the case, the false implication of the accused could not be ruled out of consideration---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed. [Paras. 5 & 6 of the judgment] Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA VS State S. 376---Rape---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Last seen evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for forcibly committing zina with the sister of the complainant---Prosecution had also produced two other witnesses---Statements of both the witnesses were in line with each other to the extent that they had seen the accused taking the victim on his vehicle---Statement of Investigating Officer confirmed that both the witnesses were brought by the complainant of the case himself in police station for recording their statements---Statements of both the witnesses showed that the same were recorded after delay of about 25-days from the date of occurrence---No explanation available on record to establish that as to why the statements of both the witnesses were recorded at belated stage and ambiguities arising in a prudent mind with regard to credibility of the said witnesses as the complainant himself managed and produced the said witnesses before the Investigating Officer for associating them in the investigation---Delay so occasioned in recording their 161, Cr.P.C. statements were not helpful for the case of prosecution due to sole reason that they did not witness the crime directly---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. [Para. 8 of the judgment] Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA VS State S.376---Rape---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Medical evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for forcibly committing zina with the sister of the complainant---Victim had brought on record that she was taken to hospital---Victim though stated in her statement that the Zina was forcible, but the Medico-Legal Certificate produced through the Investigating Officer transpired that no signs of violence were observed upon the body of the victim and even no mark of blood or discharge on Shalwar Qameez of the victim were observed---Medico-Legal Certificate had further confirmed that due to body area wash, no samples could be taken---Hymen of the victim though was found ruptured, but except that evidence there was no any solid or concrete evidence to establish that the accused was responsible for such hymen rupture of victim, when otherwise the victim was examined after two days of occurrence and till that time all the evidence were removed by the victim herself by washing her body and certainly the private parts of her body---No human sperm though was detected and non-detection of human sperm had made the statement of victim as doubtful, who otherwise alleged that the accused committed rape with her---Even otherwise, the medical report suggested no injury or sign of violence on the body of the victim and even no spot of semen was found on her clothes and even no sign of sexual intercourse was observed at the time of examination---Circumstances established that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed. [Para. 7 of the judgment] Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA VS State S. 376---Rape---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of more than two days in lodging the FIR---Scope---Accused was charged for forcibly committing zina with the sister of the complainant---Alleged occurrence took place at evening and according to the victim she on return to her house disclosed to the complainant, the fact of her rape, thus it was expected that the FIR should have been lodged promptly without any delay, but that had not been done so and the FIR was lodged after two days at about 08.30 p.m.---Due to said delay, the entire evidence that was necessary to have been collected by the Investigating Officer were damaged---No explanation on the part of prosecution to justify the delay of two days in lodging the FIR had been furnished---Main effect of registration of FIR promptly was to bring the criminal machinery into motion so that the investigation might be carried out in right direction and to enable the Investigating Agency to collect all the necessary evidence from the place of occurrence---Case of rape/zina certain evidences were required to be collected from the body of victim, but certainly after lapse of two days all the evidences were removed by the victim by washing her body and especially the private parts---Non-registration of FIR promptly had damaged the entire prosecution case---Victim mostly reiterated her early statement and confirmed that soon after her arrival in her house, she disclosed the fact of rape committed with her by the accused, but thereafter when her parents came to house, they lodged the FIR---Such assertion of victim showed that the FIR had been lodged with consultation---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. [Paras. 4 & 7 of the judgment]

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM MUSTAFA vs State S — 2023 PCrLJN 105 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported