HASSAN KHAN vs STATE — 2026 PLD 187 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.

HASSAN KHAN VS STATE. Ss. 376 & 496-B---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Rape and fornication---Re-appraisal of evidence---Delay of 7 months in registration of FIR---Consenting party---Recovery of weapon---Non-associating witness to recovery of weapon---Effect---Accused was convicted by Trial Court for committing rape with complainant / alleged victim and was sentenced to imprisonment for twenty years---Validity---After the occurrence, complainant / alleged victim came back to her house where her brother and other family members were admittedly living but she remained mum for almost 07 months---Long silence of complainant / alleged victim for a period of 07 months spoke volumes against her conduct---Story narrated by complainant / alleged victim with the delay of 07 months regarding forcible rape could not be relied upon blindly---Pistol was allegedly recovered on the pointing out of accused but the same was not used during the occurrence---Pistol was recovered from a residential house and no witness of the locality was associated during recovery proceedings, which was violative of the provisions of Section 103, Cr.P.C., therefore, such recovery could not be relied upon---It was not a case of rape as envisaged under Section 376, P.P.C. rather it was a case of fornication i.e. zina with consent, punishable under Section 496-B, P.P.C.---Supreme Court was conscious of the fact that once it was held that it was a case of fornication punishable under Section 496-B, P.P.C. then complainant / alleged victim was also liable to be proceeded against and punished as an accused of the offence of illicit intercourse with consent---Supreme Court did not punish the complainant / alleged victim at this present stage without providing her opportunity of defence, as she had not been challaned by Police and no charge of fornication under Section 496-B, P.P.C. was framed against her by Trial Court, and she had no opportunity to defend herself---Supreme Court modified conviction and sentence of accused under Section 376, P.P.C. to one under Section 496-B, P.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for five years along with fine---Appeal was disposed of. [Majority View]

HASSAN KHAN vs STATE — 2026 PLD 187 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD