Irshad Ali vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 822 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.

Irshad Ali VS State Ss. 302(b), 376 & 511---Qatl-i-amd, rape, attempted rape---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of mobile phone belonging to deceased doubtful---Accused was charged for committing murder of the sister of complainant after raping her---Record showed that the accused was arrested on 18.09.2016, whereas the memo of recovery of mobile phones was prepared on 19.09.2016---However, the prosecution case was silent on a crucial aspect that no mobile phone was recovered from the direct possession of the accused at the time of his arrest---Arrest memo did not reflect any such recovery and no explanation had been offered by the prosecution as to under what circumstances or from whom the mobile phones were allegedly secured---According to the mashir (witness to the recovery), both mobile phones were produced by brother-in-law of the accused---Notably, brother-in-law of accused was never cited as a witness by the prosecution, nor he was produced before the Court to support that version of events---Insertion of said witness into the case at a later stage raised doubts regarding the reliability of the recovery proceedings---Absence of testimony of said witness created a serious evidentiary gap, particularly concerning the chain of custody and ownership of the mobile devices---Moreover, the complainant, in his own deposition, stated that the deceased did not possess a personal mobile phone; rather, she would use a shared mobile phone kept at home---It was never the prosecution's case that the deceased had taken a mobile phone with her at the time she left home on the day of the incident---If, it was presumed that the deceased had the mobile in her possession, then the prosecution ought to have shown that the family attempted to contact her after her disappearance---However, no such effort or call record had been produced or established through evidence---Said inconsistencies and omissions not only weakened the prosecution's case but also created serious doubt as to the evidentiary value and linkage of the recovered mobile phones with the accused or the alleged offence---In the absence of a direct, proven connection, the alleged recovery could not be treated as reliable incriminating evidence against the accused---Said fact raised a significant and unanswered question as to under what circumstances brother-in-law of accused came into possession of the mobile phones allegedly belonging to the deceased and the accused---Such omissions created a significant dent in the prosecution's case, particularly in a matter resting upon circumstantial evidence, which was required by law to be of an unbroken and convincing nature---In the present case, the prosecution's reliance on that weak and unsupported piece of circumstantial evidence rendered the overall case doubtful and lacking in evidentiary integrity---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Irshad Ali vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 822 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR