BASHIR AHMED vs State S — 2025 YLR 1042 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

BASHIR AHMED VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Witnesses of extra-judicial confession not produced for evidence--- Adverse presumption---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by throwing him from a mountain---In this case, the witness of extra-judicial confession stated in his statement that the appellant admitted his guilt before him and one Mr. "A" and two other persons---During cross-examination, said witness further stated that at the time of the confession of the appellant, the Police Officials were also present, and the Police Officials made a video recording---Person's name who made the video was "AG"---Alleged witness of the confession of the appellant, was given up by the prosecution, which created some questions---Even "AG" and other Police Officials were not produced by the prosecution---Article 129(g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, provided that if any evidence available with the parties is not produced, then it will be presumed that had that evidence been produced, the same would have gone against the party producing the same---Trial Court while convicting the appellant also relied upon the video clips allegedly of the appellant in the USB produced by witness---Said video clip in USB was run on a laptop computer in the Court, and it was observed by the Trial Court that Sindhi language was allegedly used by the appellant---Trial Court did not translate the Sindhi language into Urdu and also did not corroborate the same with the testimony of witness---Nothing came on record that what was actually stated by the appellant in the said recording---Moreover, the prosecution also failed to produce the transcript of the audio recording before the Trial Court---Even otherwise, according to the report of Forensic Science Laboratory, "No opinion could be made about the editing/genuineness in the audio contents of the video file, due to unavailability of intended forensic tools"---Said piece of evidence was of no avail to the prosecution's case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

BASHIR AHMED vs State S — 2025 YLR 1042 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR