IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 75-Q OF 2021 
(On appeal against the judgment dated 01.07.2021 passed 
by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in Criminal 
Appeal No. 31/2020) 
 
Zahid son of Muhammad Ishaq  
 
 
… Petitioner 
VERSUS 
The State  
 
 
 
 
 
 
… Respondent 
 
For the Petitioner: 
Mr. Kamran Murtaza, Sr. ASC 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Baqir Shah, State counsel 
 
Date of Hearing: 
 
21.10.2021 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Petitioner was proceeded 
against in terms of the case registered vide FIR No. 43/2020 under 
Sections 377-B/354/511 PPC at Police Station Noshki for sexually 
abusing the daughter of the complainant and for using criminal force to 
the complainant. The learned Trial Court vide its judgment dated 
12.06.2021 convicted and sentenced the petitioner as under:- 
 
i) 
Under Section 377-B PPC 
To suffer 5 years RI and to pay fine of Rs.500,000/- or in 
default whereof to further suffer six months SI.  
 
 
ii) 
Under Section 354 PPC 
 
 
To suffer 2 years RI.  
 
Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 
Benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended to the 
petitioner. 
 
2. 
 
In appeal, the learned High Court vide impugned 
judgment, upheld the conviction and sentences recorded by the learned 
Trial Court. Hence, this petition seeking leave to appeal.  
3. 
 
The facts of the case as given in the impugned judgment 
are as under:- 
“2. 
Precise facts of the case are that on 27th March, 
2020 case FIR No. 43 of 2020 under Sections 377-B, 354, 
511 PPC was registered with PS Noshki on the report of 
Mst. Najma wife of Ali Jan with the allegation that on 
26.03.2020, at about 2:00 p.m. she sent her daughter 
Criminal Petition No. 75-Q/2021 
2
namely Shahida aged about 7 years to the shop for 
bringing matchbox but she did not return whereupon she 
herself went to the shop of Shafi Muhammad and asked 
him about her daughter, who told that her daughter did 
not come here, whereafter she searched her here and 
there, in the meanwhile she heard hue and cry of her 
daughter from the Baitak of her neighbor Zahid, as such 
she knocked the door of the Baitak, whereupon accused 
Zahid opened the door and she entered inside the room, 
where her daughter was fully naked but Zahid did not 
allow her to go ahead and attacked upon her and torn her 
shirt and also threw away her minor child from her lap 
thereafter she put clothes upon her daughter and went to 
her house along with her daughter, where her daughter 
Shahida told her that accused Zahid forcibly took her in 
his Baitak, removed her clothes and attempted to give his 
penis in her mouth.” The convict has done so even earlier.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. 
 
After completion of the investigation, a challan under 
Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted before the Trial Court. The 
prosecution in order to prove its case produced five witnesses. In his 
statement recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C the petitioner pleaded his 
innocence and also produced three witnesses in his defence.  
5. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR 
was registered after a delay of more than 22 hours, which shows that 
it was registered after deliberation and consultation to falsely frame 
the petitioner in the picture. Contends that the learned courts below 
have not appreciated the evidence in its true perspective and undue 
weight was given to the prosecution witnesses despite glaring 
contradictions. Contends that no independent witness was produced 
by the prosecution and all the witnesses who appeared before the 
Court are interested one. Contends that the medical evidence does not 
support the ocular account as no sign of injury was seen on the body of 
the victim. Lastly contends that the impugned judgment being contrary 
to law and facts, the same may be set aside and the petitioner may be 
acquitted of the charge.  
6. 
 
On the other hand, learned State counsel defended the 
impugned judgment. He contended that the petitioner is involved in a 
heinous offence and the evidence available on record is sufficient to 
prove the case against him, therefore, he does not deserve any 
leniency by this Court.  
7. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some 
length and have perused the evidence available on record.  
Criminal Petition No. 75-Q/2021 
3
 
 
In the instant case, the petitioner was proceeded against 
in pursuance of the aforesaid crime report wherein serious allegations 
are leveled against him. The most alarming allegation against the 
petitioner is that he tried to sexually harass a young girl aged about 7 
years, which is a very disgusting act. The petitioner was investigated 
at length and was found involved as per accusation leveled in the 
crime report. During the course of trial, the learned Trial Court after 
taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case 
and the evidence available on the record convicted the petitioner as 
stated above, which conviction and sentence was upheld by the 
learned High Court. Today during the course of proceedings before us 
we have carefully evaluated the testimonies of prosecution witnesses 
i.e. Mst. Najma, complainant (PW-1) and Mst. Shahida Bibi (PW-2). The 
whole prosecution case qua ocular account hinges upon the testimonies 
of these two witnesses. Amongst these two witnesses Mst. Shahida 
Bibi happens to be the victim of the occurrence. While making her 
statement in Court, she has narrated the whole occurrence in a very 
mature and natural manner touching the contents of the crime report 
on all aspects without any disconnection. Although the victim was of 
tender age, however, her statement depicts maturity of the highest 
level, which is in consonance with the statement of Mst. Najma (PW-1), 
who happens to be her mother. The victim has directly charged the 
petitioner for sexually abusing her while detailing the acts committed 
by him on the day of occurrence. She has further alleged that the 
petitioner was in the habit of doing this even earlier to the present 
incident. Although she was cross-examined at length but her statement 
remained in line and was testified in the most natural style, which 
reflects that whatever she has stated before the Court, she has stated 
the truth. As far as the identity of the petitioner is concerned, there is 
not an iota of doubt about his identity because he being the neighborer 
of the victim was conversant with her. It is an apathy to mention that 
such like cases are at the verge of rise in the society, which has to be 
curbed with iron hands. Although in the instant case, the statement of 
the victim is fully corroborated by the statement of PW-1 but law is 
very clear about this that the statement of the victim in isolation itself 
is sufficient for conviction if the same reflects that it is independent, 
unbiased and straight forward to establish the accusation against the 
accused.  In a recent judgment reported as Atif Zareef Vs. State (PLD 
Criminal Petition No. 75-Q/2021 
4
2021 SC 550) this Court has categorically held that “rape is a crime 
that is usually committed in private, and there is hardly any witness 
to provide direct evidence of having seen the commission of crime by 
the accused person. The courts, therefore, do not insist upon 
producing direct evidence to corroborate the testimony of the victim if 
the same is found to be confidence inspiring in the overall particular 
facts and circumstances of a case, and considers such a testimony 
of the victim sufficient for conviction of the accused person. A rape 
victim stands on a higher pedestal than an injured witness, for an 
injured witness gets the injury on the physical form while the rape 
victim suffers psychologically and emotionally.” The victim had 
specifically named the petitioner in his testimony before the Court 
and had fully identified him. There was no previous enmity between 
the parties, which could lead to false implication of the petitioner in 
the present case. So far as the delay in lodging the FIR is concerned, 
the learned High Court while relying on the judgment of this Court 
reported as Zahid Vs. State (2020 SCMR 590) has rightly held that 
in such like cases victims or their families are reluctant to come 
forward to promptly report the crime because of the trauma that has 
been suffered and they may have a perception of shame or 
dishonour in having the victim invasively examined by a doctor, 
therefore, the delay in reporting a sexual assault to the police is not 
very material. So far as the argument of learned counsel that 
according to medical evidence no sign of injury was found on the 
person of the victim is concerned, the prosecution case is that the 
petitioner had sexually abused the minor girl by firstly undressing 
her and then by touching his genital organ on the chest of the victim 
and he also tried to put his organ in the mouth of the victim. In such 
eventuality when the victim was only of seven years old and did not 
know as to what is happening with her and keeping in view the fact 
that the petitioner was known to her previously, the victim may not 
have resisted in front of the petitioner, therefore, mere non-
availability of any sign of injury is of no help to the petitioner. We 
have perused the statements of the three defence witnesses 
produced by the petitioner and could not find any credibility in the 
same. The DWs only made general statements and did not mention 
about the happening of the occurrence or anything related to the 
occurrence. They even could not remember the date of the incident. 
Criminal Petition No. 75-Q/2021 
5
As far as the plea of the petitioner in his statement under Section 
342 Cr.P.C. that the husband of the complainant (PW-1) was out of 
country and in his absence different people would visit her house 
and when she was forbidden, a quarrel took place between the 
complainant and his mother and due to this reason he was 
implicated in this case is concerned, suffice it is to say that no one 
would defame her minor daughter only on some minor quarrel 
because the honor of female daughter is always more precious for a 
mother to take revenge on a trifle issue, therefore, the same appears 
to be a concocted story just to save the skin. 
8. 
 
For what has been discussed above, this petition having 
no merit is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.   
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the  
21st of October, 2021 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram