IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
 
 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE MUSHIR ALAM 
MR. JUSTICE DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN 
 
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.465/2015  
(On appeal from the judgment dated 23.11.2010 passed by 
the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl.A.No.49/2005) 
 
Fayyaz Ahmad  
…Appellant  
Versus 
The State 
…Respondent 
 
For the appellant  
: 
Mr. Muhammad Siddique Khan Baloch, 
ASC 
 
 
 
For the State 
: 
Mirza Muhammad Usman, DPG-Punjab 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 
13.9.2017 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
  
Dost Muhammad Khan, J.—  Appellant Fayyaz Ahmad 
“Lifer” at a trial held by Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari was 
sentenced to life imprisonment u/s 302(b) PPC with benefit of 
section 382-B Cr.PC and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation 
to the LRs. of the deceased, namely, Zafar Iqbal. His appeal was 
dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 23.11.2010 by the then 
learned Chief Justice of Lahore High Court. 
 
On a jail petition, the appellant was granted leave to appeal 
vide order dated 13.10.2015 to re-appraise the evidence.  
2. 
 
Brief but relevant facts are, that Mst. Naziran Bibi 
(PW-8), while reporting the crime to the local police of police station 
Thengi, district Vehari on 29.8.1999 alleged that two days earlier 
her child, aged 3 years, was abducted by the appellant and that 
they did not make a report and sat quiet. Alleging further, that a 
day thereafter i.e. 28.08.1999, the appellant came to them and 
Crl.A. 465/2015 
2 
stated that the child is in the District Courts Vehari and they 
should accompany him to get back the child. The deceased Zafar 
accompanied him but did not turn up till late night, thus they got 
worried and went out for search and during the process of search 
they reached Chak No.56/WB, where, people had assembled in a 
cotton crop land and were talking about a dead body, thus they 
reached at the spot and identified the dead body of Zafar Iqbal 
whose throat was cut through sharp weapon, hence she charged 
the appellant Fayyaz along with Riaz and Tufail.  
3. 
 
Undeniably, rather admittedly it is an un-witnessed 
crime and the entire edifice of the prosecution case has been built 
on weakest circumstantial evidence. Two of the co-accused were 
declared innocent by the investigating agency and even they were 
not charge-sheeted.  
4. 
 
It has come in the evidence that the child was handed 
over to the complainant Mst. Naziran Bibi four days after the 
occurrence by the police. Wherefrom and from whose custody the 
child was recovered, is still a begging question having not been 
explained anywhere by any witness for the prosecution.  
5. 
 
To believe or rely on circumstantial evidence, the well 
settled and deeply entrenched principle is, that it is imperative for 
the Prosecution to provide all links in chain an unbroken one, 
where one end of the same touches the dead body and the other 
the neck of the accused. The present case is of such a nature 
where many links are missing in the chain. 
 
To carry conviction on a capital charge it is essential that 
courts have to deeply scrutinize the circumstantial evidence 
because fabricating of such evidence is not uncommon as we have 
Crl.A. 465/2015 
3 
noticed in some cases thus, very minute and narrow examination 
of the same is necessary to secure the ends of justice and that the 
Prosecution has to establish the case beyond all reasonable 
doubts, resting on circumstantial evidence. “Reasonable Doubt” 
does not mean any doubt but it must be accompanied by such 
reasons, sufficient to persuade a judicial mind for placing reliance 
on it. If it is short of such standard, it is better to discard the same 
so that an innocent person might not be sent to gallows. To draw 
an inference of guilt from such evidence, the Court has to apply its 
judicial mind with deep thought and with extra care and caution 
and whenever there are one or some indications, showing the 
design of the Prosecution of manufacturing and preparation of a 
case, the Courts have to show reluctance to believe it unless it is 
judicially satisfied about the guilt of accused person and the 
required chain is made out without any missing link, otherwise at 
random reliance on such evidence would result in failure of justice.  
6. 
  
It may also be kept in mind that sometimes the 
investigating agency collects circumstantial evidence 
seems 
apparently believable however, if the strict standards of scrutiny 
are applied there would appear many cracks and doubts in the 
same which are always inherent therein and in that case Courts 
have to discard and disbelieve the same.  
7. 
  
The last seen evidence is one of such categories of 
evidence. In this category of cases some fundamental principles 
must be followed and the Prosecution is under legal obligation to 
fulfill the same, some of which may be cited below:- 
(i) 
There must be cogent reasons that the 
deceased in normal and ordinary course was 
Crl.A. 465/2015 
4 
supposed to accompany the accused and those 
reasons must be palpable and prima facie 
furnished by the Prosecution. 
(ii) 
The proximity of the crime seen plays a vital 
role because if within a short distance the 
deceased is done to death then, ordinarily the 
inference would be that he did not part ways or 
separated from the accused and onus in this 
regard would shift to the accused to furnish 
those circumstances under which the deceased 
left him and parted ways in the course of 
transit. 
(iii) 
The timing of that the deceased was last seen 
with the accused and subsequently his murder, 
must be reasonably close to each other to 
exclude any possibility of the deceased getting 
away from the accused or the accused getting 
away from him. 
(iv) 
There must be some reasons and objects on 
account of which the deceased accompanied 
the accused for accomplishment of the same 
towards a particular destination, otherwise 
giving company by the deceased to the accused 
would become a question mark.  
(v) 
Additionally there must be some motive on the 
part of the accused to kill the deceased 
otherwise the Prosecution has to furnish 
evidence that it was during the transit that 
something happened abnormal or unpleasant 
which motivated the accused in killing the 
deceased.  
Crl.A. 465/2015 
5 
(vi) 
The quick reporting of the matter without any 
undue 
delay 
is 
essential, 
otherwise 
the 
prosecution story would become doubtful for 
the reason that the story of last seen was 
tailored or designed falsely, involving accused 
person.  
Beside 
the 
above, 
circumstantial 
evidence of last seen must be corroborated by 
independent 
evidence, 
coming 
from 
unimpeachable source because uncorroborated 
last seen evidence is a weak type of evidence 
in cases involving capital punishment. 
(vii) 
The recovery of the crime weapon from the 
accused and the opinion of the expert must be 
carried out in a transparent and fair manner to 
exclude all possible doubts, which may arise if 
it is not done in a proper and fair manner.  
(viii) 
The Court has also to seriously consider that 
whether 
the 
deceased 
was 
having 
any 
contributory role in the cause of his death 
inviting the trouble, if it was not a pre-planned 
and calculated murder.” 
7. 
 
The appellant was, allegedly, forbidden to visit the 
house of the complainant and by her mother Mst. Urshaan Bibi 
(PW-9) where they were living without earning means of livelihood; 
the reason for that was not given in the FIR, however, at the trial, 
dishonest improvements were made that the appellant was 
demanding the hand of Naziran Bibi, complainant which was 
refused by her mother thus, to compel her for the said marriage, 
the child was abducted.  
Crl.A. 465/2015 
6 
8. 
 
No prudent mind on the earth would believe that once 
the child of 3 years age of the complainant was abducted which 
incident remained un-witnessed one, by itself, was not more than 
sufficient to achieve the object by getting hand of the complainant? 
Unnatural appearance of the appellant before the complainant 
party asking them to accompany him to collect the child from the 
District Courts premises, is absolutely unbelievable aspect of the 
story as it runs counter to natural human behaviour and conduct. 
The mother love for a child is incomparable and is blessed 
with a divine spirit, having been placed on high pedestal in this 
mundane world. Even small birds and sparrows have been shown 
and noticed, attacking wild animals when its child is aggressed 
upon, risking its own life to save it. Thus, the degree of dearness of 
the child to the mother is manifold higher than a brother. If the 
abduction of the child was true then, there existed no earthly 
reason to take away the deceased Zafar Iqbal by the appellant with 
the same motive and intention. It appears absolutely a fantastic 
theory that the appellant, guilty of abducting the child, would have 
approached the complainant, because in that event he would have 
been detained with the help of others or at least police would have 
been informed about his presence; then how, to the contrary, Zafar 
Iqbal deceased was let to accompany the appellant to collect the 
child from the District Courts Premises. The entire story in this 
regard is bereft of any reason and is hard to believe being of no 
legal worth and reliance.  
9. 
  
Another intriguing aspect of the story is that instead of 
accompanying the appellant to the District Courts premises, the 
deceased went to the deserted area where his dead body was found 
Crl.A. 465/2015 
7 
in a standing cotton crop, considerably away from the District 
Courts. This deviation is neither understandable nor believable in 
the absence of any believable and reliable evidence. The brutal 
manner, the deceased was killed by cutting his throat, speaks 
volumes about a frustrated mind, full of revengeful sentiments, 
blowing high for the reasons of very strong motive behind it, which 
settled down after ruthlessly killing the deceased. The belated 
motive, attributed to the appellant by itself appears artificial, 
flimsy, feeble and not sufficient for an ordinary man to act so 
wolfishly on that account. The complainant admitted that the 
appellant was frequent visitor to their house. She and her mother, 
both were having no means to earn bread therefore, being a 
divorcee and mother of a little child, if her hand was demanded by 
the appellant, it was not less than a good fortune and blessings, 
therefore, refusal on her part is absolutely unbelievable.  
10. 
  
We have searched the case-file from folder to folder but 
could not lay hand on any piece of corroboratory evidence to lend 
support to the weak circumstantial evidence. The crime knife, 
recovered at the instance of the appellant and that too after many 
days after his police custody is of no help to the prosecution 
because it was not shown stained with human blood.  
11. 
  
The above factual infirmities apart, in three successive 
investigations, conducted by different investigating officers no 
definite opinion was formed by anyone about the guilt of the 
appellant as all of them stated on oath at the trial that the 
investigations carried out by them were inconclusive about the 
guilt of the appellant, causing the murder of Zafar Iqbal and of 
abducting the child. It is strange enough that the child was 
Crl.A. 465/2015 
8 
recovered by the police according to the evidence on record but the 
appellant was not charged for the abduction.  
12. 
  
The autopsy report would suggest that the deceased 
was done to death 48 hours before the examination of the dead 
body by the medicolegal officer. This circumstance completely 
negates and nullifies the prosecution stance about the time of the 
departure of the deceased with the appellant and has cut the roots 
of the prosecution case.  
13. 
  
In view of the combined study of the entire evidence 
and careful re-appraisal of the same we are led to an inescapable 
conclusion that the prosecution case is full of improbabilities, legal 
and factual infirmities of fatal nature and is pregnant with bristling 
doubts of grave nature. Thus, the prosecution has miserably failed 
to connect the neck of the appellant with the crime in any manner 
whatsoever.  
14. 
  
Before parting with this judgment, we express our 
concerns and are at loss as to how the Trial Court convicted the 
appellant, more so, the learned Judge of the High Court 
maintained the conviction, which amounts to serious miscarriage 
of justice.  
 
For what has been discussed above, this appeal is allowed. 
The appellant is acquitted of all the charges leveled against him. 
He shall be set free forthwith if not required to be detained in any 
other case.  
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
Islamabad, the   
13th September, 2017 
Nisar/-  
 
 
“Approved for reporting’