Muhammad Nadeem Aslam vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1698 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.

Muhammad Nadeem Aslam VS State Ss. 302(b), 363, 377 & 201---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.40---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping, sodomy, causing disappearance of evidence---Appreciation of evidence---Disclosure of accused before police---Reliance---Scope---Accused was charged for kidnapping and murdering the minor son of complainant after committing sodomy with him---Record showed that appellant was arrested on 09.05.2017 by Investigating Officer, who summoned complainant and other witnesses in the Police Station where the appellant made disclosures about commission of sodomy with deceased, commission of murder of the deceased through giving him electric shock and pointing out the place where he threw the dead body of deceased---Admittedly said facts were not known to complainant and other witnesses prior to the arrest of the appellant which had changed the dynamics of the case---Pursuant to the said disclosures the appellant got recovered the dead body of deceased---Regarding the recovery of dead body, Investigating Officer prepared the memo. of place of recovery, the perusal of which unfolded that he got recovered a sack from the bushes, out of which the dead body of deceased was recovered---Investigating Officer also prepared the memo. of identification attested by witnesses---As far as the disclosure of the appellant that he committed sodomy before murdering deceased through giving him the electric shocks was concerned, the medical evidence furnished by Medical Officer was very much relevant in that regard---According to medical evidence, blood clots were present on anal canal, two anal tears were found in 03 O'clock and 11 O'clock position and were fresh having blood surface---In this view of the matter, there was no ambiguity that deceased was sodomized before he was done to death---Other disclosure of appellant was regarding the manner by which victim was done to death---Though Medical Officer did not comment upon the cause of death, however it was due to mild to moderate stage of putrefaction and the manner of disposal of dead body described by the doctor was homicidal in nature---Even otherwise, the recovery of extension lead and wire at the disclosure of the appellant proved his culpability as far as it related to death of deceased through electric shocks---Though the disclosures were made by the appellant in police custody even then discovery of any fact on the information of accused in custody of police was admissible in the eye of law and under Art.40 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, thus due weight would be given keeping in view the new facts brought on record---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case beyond shadow of doubt, however, prosecution failed to prove the motive part of the case, therefore death sentence was converted into life imprisonment---With the modification in the sentence, appeal was dismissed.

Muhammad Nadeem Aslam vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1698 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ