Rizwan Abdul Kalam vs State Ss — 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of weapon of offence on the pointation of accused doubtful---Accused were charged for committing murder of sister of complainant by stabbing her---Prosecution heavily relied on the recoveries of crime weapons allegedly recovered on the pointation of accused persons and claimed that after confession as to his involvement in the commission of crime, one of the appellants on the same day (14.12.2017) voluntarily led the police to the place of pointation and got recovered a knife, used in the commission of offence, lying under a wooden foundation of fridge---On the other hand, the complainant, who was one of the mashirs of recovery of knife, in his deposition had stated that one of the appellants led the police party towards his house and got recovered a knife from beneath the fridge---Complainant had not uttered a single word about the wooden foundation under the fridge---Complainant had not disclosed the specific date and time when appellant produced the knife for police on his pointation---Statement of complainant was belied by his friend, who while appearing before the trial Court had deposed that during interrogation appellant disclosed that he had thrown churri under the refrigerator and voluntarily led the police to his house where Investigating Officer obtained key from the owner of the house and opened the house and thereafter appellant took them towards the refrigerator and got recovered a churri lying under the chowky whereas the complainant did not disclose any such detail---Record was suggestive of the fact that police arrested appellants on 09.12.2017 from outside their house and during interrogation at spot, one of the appellants disclosed about the knife, used in the commission of offence, hidden alongside the gate of his house and got it recovered on his pointation---On the other hand, the complainant, who was one of the mashirs of memo of recovery, deposed that after his arrest said appellant led the police party inside his house and got recovered a knife whereas a witness in his deposition had stated that police recovered the knife from behind the main gate of the house on the pointation of said appellant---Complainant and mashirs in their respective depositions had furnished squarely different versions and contradicted each other as to the exact place of recovery which created serious doubts about the arrest of appellants and recovery of alleged knives on their pointation---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Delay in sending the recovered weapon of offence to laboratory---Consequential---Accused were charged for committing murder of sister of complainant by stabbing her---Mere recovery of crime knives in absence of any direct or any other incriminating evidence could not be made basis for convicting an accused in a crime of capital punishment in view of admitted delay in sending the alleged recovered churri (knife) to the office of Forensic Division and that too without furnishing any plausible explanation---There was no evidence or any other material to substantiate that finger prints on knife were of appellant more particularly when the incident was alleged to be based on suspicion and previous grudge---Even otherwise, the recoveries of incriminating articles viz crime weapons and blood-stained articles as well as availability of finger print were always considered to be corroborative pieces of evidence and such kind of evidence by itself was not sufficient to bring home the charges against an accused especially when no direct evidence had been brought on record and the other material put-forward by the prosecution in respect of guilt of the appellants had been disbelieved---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Statement of accused recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of sister of complainant by stabbing her---Record was suggestive of the fact that the alleged recovered knives were not confronted to appellants at the time of recording their statements under S.342, Cr.P.C.---Examination of an accused under S.342, Cr.P.C. is not a formality but a legal requirement whose primary purpose is to apprise him of all the incriminating material that has been brought against him during the trial and providing him an opportunity to explain his position with respect to it---If a piece of evidence is not put to an accused while recording his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C., it could not be used against him while awarding conviction---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---It is better that ten guilty persons be acquitted rather than one innocent person be convicted. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Extra-judicial confession---Weak type of evidence---Accused were charged for committing murder of sister of complainant by stabbing her---Appellants had been shown arrested on 09.12.2017 on the pointation of complainant and during interrogation they confessed the commission of offence before police in presence of complainant and his friend on 14.12.2017---Question arose as to why the appellants made admission when there was no palpable reason for them to make an extra-judicial confession before police in presence of complainant and his friend, whose conduct was also a relevant factor for determining credibility of extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the appellants---Complainant was not an eye-witness of the incident but he nominated the appellants as killers of his sister in his FIR recorded on 09.12.2017, whereas as per prosecution case itself the appellants admitted the commission of offence before him on 14.12.2017---Question arose as to from which source complainant came to know that his sister was murdered by her in-laws and no explanation to that extent had been brought on record---Extra-judicial confession is a weak evidence---When an accused makes an admission before police about his guilt then it is obligatory upon the Police Officer before whom he made such a confession to produce him before a competent Court of law for recording his statement under S.164, Cr.P.C., which had not been done, therefore, the alleged confessions of appellants would amount to confessions before police---Record was silent as to what were the circumstances which made the appellants confess---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Unnatural conduct of complainant---Accused were charged for committing murder of sister of complainant by stabbing her---In the case in hand, the conduct of the complainant seemed to be doubtful because he had implicated four persons of a family claiming them to be the killers of his sister---Complainant was not an eye-witness of the incident---Specific plea taken by the appellants in their defence was that it was a love marriage and complainant was unhappy of the marriage of his sister with one of the accused persons and he also did not attend the marriage ceremony of his sister, therefore, he had falsely implicated them in the commission of murder of his sister owing to previous grudge---Record was also suggestive of the fact that the person before whom the alleged confession was made by the appellants was a friend of complainant, hence there was every likelihood that being a friend he had supported the complainant and deposed falsely against appellants---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rizwan Abdul Kalam VS State Medical evidence---Scope---When no direct evidence has been brought on record and the circumstantial evidence has already been disbelieved, conviction cannot be based solely on medical evidence---Medical evidence is not a corroborative piece of evidence rather confirmatory in nature, which can be used to confirm or contradict the medical evidence with other pieces of evidence---Medical evidence cannot be considered as a corroborative piece of evidence connecting an accused with the crime, but only confirms the location, kind of weapon used in the commission of offence and timing of the injuries inflicted.

Rizwan Abdul Kalam vs State Ss — 2025 MLD 488 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD