MUHAMMAD WAJID vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1399 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.

MUHAMMAD WAJID VS State Ss. 302(b) & 376---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, rape---Re-appraisal of evidence---Sentence, quantum of---Accused was charged for committing rape with the minor daughter of the complainant and then murdering her---High Court had rightly declined to accept the confessional statement of the appellant to the extent of the alleged commission of rape thereby acquitting him under Section 376, P.P.C., as the findings of the High Court in that regard were based on proper appreciation of medical evidence on record as well as the confessional statement of the appellant wherein he had not stated in unequivocal words anything about commission of rape with the minor deceased---Such approach of the High Court was in consonance with the settled principle that where a confessional statement was not the sole basis of the prosecution case and was corroborated by other evidence, the Court may accept the inculpatory parts that supported the established facts and reject the portions that were inconsistent or uncorroborated---In view of the corroborative circumstantial evidence including last seen testimony, recovery, medical findings and the voluntary confession, the partial exclusion of the rape charge did not detract from the overall prosecution case under Section 302(b), P.P.C.---Prosecution had succeeded in establishing an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence, each link corroborating the other and collectively pointing accurately towards the guilt of the appellant---Confessional statement, though retracted, met the legal requirements of voluntariness and truthfulness and was adequately corroborated---Therefore, the conviction of the appellant under Section 302(b), P.P.C., was well-founded and sustainable in law---So far as the sentence of death awarded to the appellant under Section 302(b) P.P.C., was concerned, the record reflected that the appellant had remained in continuous incarceration since his arrest on 20.12.2011 and had been confined in the death cell following the pronouncement of the death sentence by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 28.01.2014, a period extending over a decade, while on the other hand, there were some inconsistencies of a minor dimension in prosecution evidence which threw up doubts about prosecution version but did not qualify for acquittal---Such fact was merely a mitigating circumstance capable of affecting no more than quantum of sentence---Such inconsistencies may create dilution of prosecution version but not its complete negation---Furthermore, the High Court in its well-reasoned judgment had expressly held that the medical evidence on record did not support the confessional statement of the appellant insofar as the allegation of rape upon the minor deceased was concerned---Consequently, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 376, P.P.C., were set aside---In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this aspect may justly be treated as a mitigating circumstance for the commutation of the sentence of death into imprisonment for life---Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed.

MUHAMMAD WAJID vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1399 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR