2024 PCr.LJ 1764
Conviction can only be awarded on the basis of circumstantial evidence when it impeccably connects the accused with the commission of crime.For awarding conviction, the incriminating circumstances must be so closely inter-woven with each other that from their appraisal no conclusion other than guilt of accused is to be drawn. Any break in the chain of circumstances or legal inadmissibility of its any part renders such evidence unworthy of credence and cannot be used for raising the superstructure of conviction.
Admittedly, in accordance with the conclusion given by expert, the report regarding the visuals captured in the CCTV Camera and extract from DVR cannot be used for awarding conviction to appellant keeping in view the principle laid down in Ishtiaq Ahmad Mirza case (PLD 2019 SC 675).
We are mindful of the fact that the report through necessary implication of section 9(3) of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency Act 2007 was per se admissible but since it was not in favour of prosecution thus the expert could still be summoned as court witness to remove ambiguity arising out of it. Strangely, no effort whatsoever was made by the prosecution to do the needful of summoning the expert from the PFSA as witness in the case. There was another remedy available to the prosecution under section 12 of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency Act 2007 but no step even in this regard was taken. According to section 12, any person affected from the opinion of an expert can move an application before the court for re-examination of the substance upon which report is issued by the PFSA. Upon such application, the court, if satisfied that the opinion of expert needs reconsideration, can pass an order to the PFSA for reexamination through a penal of three or more experts.
The DNA evidence can attain admissibility if prosecution satisfactorily proves the process of sampling, safe custody and onward transmission to the office of PFSA and the foregoing process is called in the field of forensic as doctrine of analysis and it stresses for flawless sampling, correct packing, safe custody and above all free from doubt transmission to the office of expert. Any defect in the aforementioned process makes even the positive DNA report doubtful in nature forcing the courts to discard it from consideration.
Murder Reference
44-22
THE STATE VS ABDUL HAKEEM
0 Comments