IMRAN alias MANI vs State Ss — 2024 SCMR 1811 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.

IMRAN alias MANI VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Offence of Zina (Enforcement Of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10(2)---Qatl-i-amd, common intention, zina---Material eye-witnesses not testifying---Motive not proved---Unnatural conduct of eye-witnesses in not saving the deceased---Incidentally, all the three stated eye-witnesses were related and were also related to the deceased, however, one of them did not testify as he was given up---Another material witness also did not testify as he too was given up for no reason---Site plan showed the room in which the stated zina was being committed, which was at one end of the house and the room in which the deceased were being killed was at the very opposite end---These two rooms were separated by a courtyard and another room---Placement of the rooms was such that the deceased would not be able to see into the room where the alleged zina was being committed even if the doors of both these rooms were left open---Therefore, the stated motive to kill the deceased, that is, their witnessing the appellant (accused) and co-accused committing zina, did not stand to reason, and, thus, there was no reason to silence them---It was also not the prosecution's case that the deceased were alerted and had come to investigate nor that they were killed at a place other than in their own room---It was also most unlikely, if not wholly unbelievable, that while committing zina the appellant would suddenly be motivated to proceed to kill two elderly persons who lay sleeping---And, assuming that the appellant had been found committing zina by the three eye-witnesses it was but reasonable to presume that the appellant would get dressed and make good their escape or would try to do so---Entire case of the prosecution rested on the testimony of two witnesses, one of whom testified that after he gained entry into the house of the deceased persons, one of them was alive for about fifteen to twenty minutes and the other for about ten to fifteen minutes, however, he did absolutely nothing to save their lives; no first aid was rendered, no attempt was made to shift them to a hospital or send for a doctor or any local medical practitioner---As regards the offence of zina no article was recovered which may have had the appellant's semen which could be his clothing, the bedsheet/mattress, bed or any other place on which the said act was stated to have been committed---And, it did not stand to reason, that zina was being committed in a fully lit room, which could be seen into from the road, nor that immediately after committing zina the appellant would set upon to kill (for no apparent reason) the deceased, who were the co-accused's in-laws---Prosecution had completely failed to establish its case, let alone met the required test of beyond reasonable doubt---Therefore, the convictions and resultant sentences of the appellant could not be sustained and the impugned judgment and that of the Trial Court were set aside by allowing the appeal---Appellant was acquitted of all charges levelled against him.

IMRAN alias MANI vs State Ss — 2024 SCMR 1811 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR