SANAULLAH vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 609 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.

SANAULLAH VS STATE. Ss. 302(b), 364-A, 377 & 34---Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting a minor for murder, unnatural offence, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---DNA evidence---Circumstantial evidence---Reliance---Scope. The accused was charged for abducting the son of the complainant, committing unnatural offence and murdering him. The record showed that the testimonies of three witnesses, although they were not eye-witnesses of the occurrence, were significant as they confirmed that on 25.07.2021, the deceased went missing. The said witnesses came to know about the discovery of a dead body in the hospital mortuary through the police and subsequently identified the deceased. The evidence regarding disappearance of the minor and subsequent discovery of his dead body, as revealed by the star witnesses, was found reliable and trustworthy. Their natural presence at the relevant place further corroborated their accounts. Additionally, the statement of the Medical Officer, the Police Surgeon, along with the post-mortem report of the deceased and the Medico-Legal Certificates of the accused and co-accused, provided critical evidence regarding the occurrence. The Police Surgeon opined that the deceased had been subjected to forcible carnal intercourse and subsequently murdered with a blunt weapon. Furthermore, the Medical Officer confirmed that the accused was medically potent and capable of performing sexual intercourse. The testimonies of the remaining witnesses and the DNA result, along with its conclusion, established that seminal material was found on the anal swab of the deceased, stained sections taken from the shalwar qameez of the deceased and human blood was identified on stained sections taken from the shalwar of the appellant. The DNA profile obtained from sperm fractions of items Nos. 1, 4.1, 4.5 and 4.10 and epithelial fractions of items Nos. 1 and 4.5 matched the DNA profile of the appellant. The probability of finding an unrelated individual at random from the population as being the source of DNA obtained from sperm fraction of items Nos. 1, 4.1, 4.5 and 4.10 and epithelial fractions of items Nos. 1 and 4.5 was approximately one in 64 sextillion in Caucasians. The evidence presented collectively supported the prosecution's case and established a coherent chain of circumstantial evidence which remained intact and directly connected the accused with the commission of offence. Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances, however, the revision petition filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence was allowed by enhancing the sentence from life imprisonment to capital punishment of death.

SANAULLAH vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 609 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ