Syed Asadullah Ali Shah vs State S — 2026 MLD 192 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.

Syed Asadullah Ali Shah VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b), 370, 374, 328-A, 506, 171, 311, 376(3), 377-B & 34---Sindh Prohibition of Employment of Children Act (III of 2017), Ss. 3 & 14---Qatl-i-amd, buying or disposing of any person as a slave, unlawful compulsory labour, cruelty to child, criminal intimidation, wearing garb or carrying token used by public servant with fraudulent intent, ta'zir after waiver or compounding of the right of qisas in qatl-i-amd, rape, unnatural offence, common intention, prohibition of employment of child---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegations against the accused-applicants were that they physically abused and maltreated the minor daughter of complainant---First Information Report was lodged after a delay of two days from the date of the alleged occurrence, without satisfactory explanation on record---Such delay tarnished the authenticity of the FIR and provided room for deliberation, consultation, and potential fabrication of facts, thereby shaking the foundational credibility of the prosecution's version---Post-mortem report, an objective, scientific piece of evidence, recorded the cause of death as "cardiac arrest secondary to trauma" and categorically ruled out any evidence of sexual assault---Such finding substantially undermined the applicability of Ss. 376(3) & 377, P.P.C, and raised a serious question whether the nature of trauma was homicidal, accidental, or otherwise---When medical evidence did not fully support the gravest charge, the matter fell within the domain of further inquiry under S.497(2), Cr.P.C.---Several material prosecution witnesses, had been examined before the Trial Court and had categorically resiled from the prosecution's story, instead stating that the deceased died a natural death and exonerated the applicants---Said complete departure from the initial version gravely undermined the substratum of the prosecution case and, even at a tentative stage, created reasonable doubt---Benefit of doubt, however slight, must be extended to the accused even at the bail stage---Prosecution case rested purely on circumstantial evidence, there being no direct eye-witness account of the alleged homicidal act---Supplementary statement implicating applicant prima facie appeared to be an afterthought---Where the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete or doubtful, the accused should not be deprived of liberty pending trial---Complainant and her husband, being legal heirs of the deceased, had filed No-Objection Affidavits expressing no objection to the grant of bail to the applicants---Applicants had remained behind bars for a considerable period, yet the trial had not concluded---Right to a speedy trial was enshrined in Art.10-A of the Constitution---Arts. 9 and 10-A of the Constitution guaranteed the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty---In the face of material contradictions, medical evidence negating the gravest charge, and a hostile prosecution case, continued detention would be punitive in nature, which was impermissible at the pre-conviction stage---In such circumstances, and even on a tentative appraisal, the case against the applicants was fraught with serious doubts and squarely attracted the principle of further inquiry under S.497(2), Cr.P.C---Bail applications were allowed, accordingly.

Syed Asadullah Ali Shah vs State S — 2026 MLD 192 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD