PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 470 (DB)
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)--
----S. 302(b)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Qatl-e-amd--benefit of doubt--Recovery of letters and weapon of offence--Call data evidence--Extra-judicial confession--Evidence of wajtakkar--Last seen evidence--Medical evidence may confirm ocular evidence with regard to seat of injury, nature of injury, kind of weapon used in occurrence but it would not connect accused with commission of crime--One tainted piece of evidence could not corroborate another piece of tainted evidence because if this is allowed to be done then very necessity of corroboration would be frustrated--Held: It is settled principle of law that for giving benefit of doubt, it is not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubt--If there is a circumstance which creates reasonable doubt in prudent mind about guilt of accused, then he would be entitled to its benefit not as a matter of grace or concession, but as of right--Appeal was allowed. [P. 475] A, B & C
PLJ 2008 SC 687 and 2009 SCMR 1410.
Mr. Mudassar Saghir, Advocate for Appellants.
Mr. Adnan Latif Sheikh, DPG for State.
M/s. Syed Ali Haider Bukhari and Muhammad Sharif Bhutta, Advocates for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 22.9.2021.
PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 470 (DB)
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Sadaqat Ali Khan and Shehram Sarwar Ch., JJ.
MUHAMMAD IMRAN AAMIR etc.--Appellants
versus
STATE etc.--Respondents
Crl. A. Nos. 800, 790 & M.R No. 124 of 2017, heard on 22.9.2021.
Judgment
Sadaqat Ali Khan, J.--Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant) along with Muhammad Ramzan and Ghulam Abbas (accused since acquitted) have been tried by learned trial Court in case FIR No. 488 dated 17.10.2014 offences under Section 302/34, PPC registered at Police Station Alpa, District Multan, and was convicted and sentenced vide judgement dated 31.05.2017 as under:-
Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant)
u/S. 302(b), PPC Sentenced to DEATH as Ta'zir for committing Qatl-i-Amd of Muhammad Javed (deceased) with compensation of Rs. 200,000/- payable to legal heirs of deceased under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. and in default thereof to further undergo 6-months S.I.
2. Appellant has filed this Criminal Appeal against his conviction, complainant has filed Crl. Appeal against acquittal of respondents/accused whereas learned trial Court has sent Murder Reference for confirmation of death sentence of Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant) or otherwise, which are being decided through this single judgment.
3. Brief facts of' the case have been stated by the complainant Muhammad Shoban (PW-8) in his statement before the learned trial Court, which is hereby reproduced as under for narration of the facts:
“Stated that on 16.10.2014 my son Muhammad Javed went to Nestlay factory BZU for labour/learning and did not return in the evening. I started to trace him round about after 8:00 P.M. I and Saeed Abbas tried to search for him but no information was received and he could not be traced. On the next day early in the morning round about about 7:00 AM. I gat incorporated a rapt of missing my son. After incorporating the rapat again we made efforts to trace my son. Whereafter, after Juma prayer SHO P.S. Alpa telephonically asked me to reach near Adda Siddique Abad. When I reached near Adda Siddique Abad there was a gathering of people and I saw my son in murdered position where I identified the body of my deceased son. My real brother Manzoor Hussain and Haji Nazir Ahmad Maitla were present at the time of identification of body of my deceased son. The police took the dead body of my son, Blood stained earth and proceeded to Nishtar Hospital Multan whereafter I and witnesses reached the police station for registration of case against the unknown persons. After registration of FIR, I and my brother/witnesses came to Nishtar Hospital Multan and received the dead body of my deceased son after conduct of postmortem in the late night. We took the dead body of deceased to house for funeral proceedings. The whole of the family gathered and the timing of Numaz-i-Junazah was settled for next day. After three days from burial of my son we came to Ramzan Gill official at P.S. Saddar Multan for getting Mobile phone data etc. We provided cell No. of Javed to Ramzan Gill at P.S. Saddar Multan. On the next date again we attended the Police Station Multan where Muhammad Ramzan Gill official told me that as per data/record of the cell number of deceased Javed was being connected with the cell Number of sim which was being used by the accused Imran.
The official Muhammad Ramzan Gill told me that the person using cell Number which was being connecting with the cell Number of the deceased is suspected to be the culprit. Whereafter I reached police station and told Amanullah SI about data collection detail and suspicion of Muhammad Ramzan Gill. On 22.11.2014 Amanullah SI arrested the accused Imran and Muhammad Ramzan. Amanullah SI required my supplementary statement for naming the said accused persons and I submitted written supplementary statement to Amanullah SI wherein nominating the three accused person present in the Court. I disclosed in my supplementary statement the information which I received from Muhammad Ramzan Gill and the statement of Haqnawaz son of Rabnawaz and Muhammad Tahir, Manzoor Hussain Arshad regarding the involvement of the accused persons in the occurrence of murder of my son. Police/Amanullah SI did not record my supplementary statement above referred, whereafter I filed a writ petition under Section 22-A, Cr.P.C. and then police recorded my supplementary statement on 13.11.2014.”
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as learned D.P.G., and on perusing the record with their assistance observed as under:
i. On 17.10.2014 Muhammad Shoban, complainant PW-8 got registered FIR stating therein that on 16.10.2014, his son Muhammad Javed went to Nestle Factory BZU for labour but did not return in the evening, on 17.10.2014 he (Muhammad Shoban, complainant PW-8) got registered Rapt of his missing, during search found his dead body near Adda Siddique Abad. FIR was lodged against unknown accused.
ii. No person from the prosecution claims to be the eye-witness rather case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence which is categorised as under:
CALL DATA
iii. Aman Ullah S.I. PW-4 stated in his statement before the trial Court that on 25.10.2014, Mobile Call Data of Muhammad Javed (deceased) was received which is placed as Exh.PF (not available in paper book, even Exh.PF is the recovery memo. of Churri). According to Mobile Call Data of Muhammad Javed (deceased) incoming and outgoing phone call exchanged between Muhammad Javed (deceased) and Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant) were found. Neither call data has been produced nor detail of contents of conversation between Muhammad Javed (deceased) and Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant) has been disclosed. Hence this evidence is not believable.
RECOVERY OF LETTERS AND WEAPON OF OFFENCE
iv. Aman Ullah S.I. PW-14 stated in his statement before the trial Court that on 12.11.2014 appellant was arrested, on the same day, he disclosed and got recovered letters from the roof of his house allegedly written by Mst. Sumera Bibi, widow of Muhammad Javed (deceased) to Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant). Mst. Sumera Bibi is neither accused nor witness in this case. Even otherwise this recovery is not believable. This witness (Amanullah S.I. P.W.14) further stated that on 19.11.2014 appellant during interrogation disclosed and got recovered “Churri” from the cotton crop which being an open place is accessible to everyone, hence this recovery is also not believable.
EVIDENCE OF WAJTAKKAR.
v. Muhammad Tahir PW-7 stated in his statement before the trial Court that on 16.10.2014 at 7.30 p.m. he saw Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant), Muhammad Ramzan and Ghulam Abbas (accused since acquitted) near Siddique Abad stop Band Bosan Road, while riding on two motorcycles. This witness has already been disbelieved to the extent of co-accused Muhammad Ramzan and Ghulam Abbas, who have been acquitted through the impugned judgment and is not believable to the extent of appellant.
EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION
vi. Manzoor Hussain Arshad PW-6 stated in his statement before the trial Court that on 21.10.2014 at 8.00 p.m. he was sitting with his cousin Rabnawaz (not PW) in his house, where appellant (Muhammad Imran Aamir) and his co-accused (Muhammad Ramzan and Ghulam Abbas) came there and made confession regarding the present occurrence which being joint confession is inadmissible evidence has already been disbelieved to the extent of co-accused (Muhammad Ramzan and Ghulam Abbas) who have been acquitted through the impugned judgment and is not believable to the extent of appellant.
LAST SEEN
vii. Muhammad Haqnawaz PW-9 stated in his statement before the trial Court that on 16.10.2014 he saw Muhammad Javed (deceased) in the company of Muhammad Imran Aamir (appellant) and Muhammad Ramzan (accused since acquitted) near Care Cosmetics Factory on Motorcycle while going towards Multan. Evidence of this witness is also not believable as same has been disbelieved to the extent of Muhammad Ramzan (co-accused since acquitted).
6. For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is allowed, Conviction and Sentence of the appellant (Muhammad Imran Aamir) awarded by learned trial Court through impugned judgment are hereby set-aside and he is acquitted of the charge. He is directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Murder Reference is answered in NEGATIVE and death Sentence of appellant (Muhammad Imran Aamir) is NOT CONFIRMED.
7. In view of above decision, Crl. Appeal filed by the complainant against acquittal of respondents/accused having no merits is dismissed.
(A.A.K.) Appeal allowed
0 Comments