IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
 
MR. JUSTICE EJAZ AFZAL KHAN  
 
 
MR. JUSTICE DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN 
 
 
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL  
 
MR. JUSTICE DR. MUHAMMAD AL-GHAZALI, HM-I  
 
 
MR. JUSTICE DR. MUHAMMAD KHALID MASUD, HM-II 
 
 
 
Criminal Appeal No.07(S)/2011 
a/w Criminal Shariat Appeal No.26/2009  
(On appeal from the judgment dated 15.7.2008 
passed by the Federal Shariat Court, Islamabad 
in Jail. Crl.A.No.195/I/2003 and 
Crl.MR.No.16/I/2003) 
 
 
Imran @ dully  
 
……Appellant in Crl.Sh.A.No.07/2011 
Farzand Ali   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
……Appellant in Crl.Sh.A.No.26/2009 
 
Versus  
The State 
 
 
 
 
 
 
……Respondent in Crl.Sh.A.No.07/2011 
Imran @ Dulli etc  
 
 
 
 
 
 
……Respondents in 
Crl.Sh.A.No.26/2009 
 
 
For the appellants: 
 
Mr. Muhammad Ilyas Siddiqi, ASC              
 
 
 
 
 
(In Crl.Sh.A. 26/09) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Arshad Ali Ch, ASC 
 
 
 
 
 
(In Crl.Sh. A.07/11) 
 
For the State: 
 
 
Ch. Zubair Ahmed Farooq,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Addl.PG.Pb.  
 
Date of hearing:  
 
29.10.2014 
 
 
 
 
 
  
JUDGMENT  
 
 
Dost Muhammad Khan, M.— This Criminal Appeal (Sh) 
alongwith Criminal Appeal No.26(S)/2009 has arisen in the 
following background:- 
 
Allegedly on 10.06.2002 Ms. Zunaira age 9 
years, daughter of the complainant went out of the 
house to purchase french cookies from a nearby 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
2 
shop. However, she did not return, which caused 
alarm in the mind of the complainant, thus, he went 
out along with Muhammad Riaz (PW-9) and one 
Muhammad Saleem (not produced) in search of her. 
Repeated 
announcements 
were 
made 
through 
loudspeaker in the area about disappearance of the 
girl but no body responded nor any clue about her 
could be found. It was on 11.06.2002 that the 
complainant again started search along with the 
same two persons and at 0800 hrs. they discovered 
her dead body lying naked in the deserted compound 
of Haji Muhammad Akram in street No.13, Mohalla 
Rashidabad. The two companions were left behind at 
the spot, while the complainant reported the matter 
to PS Jhang Bazar, Faisalabad at 10:20 am, charging 
unknown culprits for her kidnapping and then killing 
her.  
(ii) 
During 
the 
course 
of 
investigation 
on 
18.06.2002 the statements of Muhammad Siddique 
(not produced) and Amjad Ali were recorded 
alongwith the supplementary statement of the 
complainant. Both deposed that they had seen the 
deceased girl in the company of the appellant Imran 
on 10.06.2002 at about 8:00 pm, who was holding 
hand of the girl, however, they did not take it much 
abnormal to inquire from him (appellant) as to why 
and where he was taking the deceased girl.  
(iii) 
On account of the charge laid at the door of 
the appellant Imran, he was arrested on 26.06.2002. 
During police custody, he confessed before the 
investigating officer that he abducted the deceased 
girl, committed rape upon her and then killed her 
and threw away her dead body. He also led the 
police party to his house where blood stained sheet 
(Chadar) was recovered having been pointed out by 
him. The same was sent to the Chemical Examiner, 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
3 
who returned his opinion that it was human blood, 
without conducting the test of grouping with the rest 
of the articles, having blood stains. On 28.06.2002 
Local General Councilor Ghulam Abbas (PW-10) and 
some other locals appeared before the investigating 
officer. The Councilor claimed that the appellant in 
the company of his father confessed before him that 
he was involved in the crime and requested for 
effecting compromise with the father of the deceased 
girl. However, he was of a little help to the appellant 
because in the previous local bodies elections the 
appellant and his relatives were supporters of the 
rival candidate. Anyhow, he promised to make effort 
in this regard.  
(iv) 
On the other hand, the dead body was 
examined by lady doctor Farah Rauf (PW-5). On 
external examination, she found a blue-printed 
trouser tied around her neck, both legs were tied 
with white colour cloth, above the ankles. The shirt 
and trouser of the deceased were stained with blood. 
She also found ant-bites all over the body including 
the face. Her tongue was slightly protruded, which 
was bitten by teeth on its tip. The lady doctor found 
a single brownish ligature mark on the neck of the 
deceased, size 1.5x13 cm. from left to right. Swabs 
were taken for detection of semen and its analysis by 
the Chemical Examiner including grouping. Posterior 
vaginal walls were found torn upto the rectal wall 
including the anal sphincter. Hymen was found torn 
and vagina was found bruised. Clotted blood was 
found in the trachea. According to her opinion, the 
death 
was 
due 
to 
asphyxia, 
caused 
through 
strangulation and that sexual assault was probably 
made on her.  
2. 
  
At the conclusion of the investigation, charge 
sheet was filed in the Court and the trial Judge at the 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
4 
conclusion of the trial awarded death sentence to the 
appellant 
u/s 
302(b) 
PPC 
with 
compensation 
of 
Rs.50,000/- u/s 544-A Cr.P.C.; he was further convicted 
and sentenced to 14 years R.I. u/s 364-A PPC; 7 years R.I. 
+fine of Rs.5,000/- or six months S.I. in default of 
payment of fine; and 10 years R.I.+ fine of Rs.10,000/- 
u/s 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) 
Ordinance, 1979 or six months S.I. in default of payment 
of fine.  
3. 
  
On appeal the learned Federal Shariat Court 
also found the appellant guilty of the charges, however, his 
conviction u/s 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of 
Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, recorded by the trial Court was 
altered to one u/s 10(3) of the Ordinance, while his 
conviction u/s 201 PPC was quashed. The rest of the 
convictions and sentences recorded by the trial Court were 
maintained except the death sentence, which was reduced 
to life imprisonment u/s 302(b) PPC.  
4. 
  
We have heard the learned ASCs for the 
appellant in both the appeals, the learned Additional 
Prosecutor, Punjab and have carefully gone through the 
entire record with an extra degree of care and caution and 
our findings are as follows:- 
 
The entire edifice/structure of the prosecution 
case 
is 
founded 
on 
the 
following 
pieces 
of 
circumstantial evidence:- 
(i) 
The last seen evidence given by PW 
Amjad Ali and Muhammad Siddique 
(not produced); 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
5 
(ii) 
The recovery of blood stained spread 
sheet (chadar) having been pointed 
out by the appellant; 
(iii) 
The extra judicial confession made on 
20.06.2006 
before 
one 
Ghulam 
Abbas, the local councilor of the Union 
Council of Halqa No.268, in presence 
of his father and Mubeen Arshad (PW-
11); 
 
 
 
AND  
(iv) 
The confirmatory medical evidence 
with regard to the rape committed 
upon the deceased girl and then 
causing 
her 
death 
through 
strangulation and also the Chemical 
Examiner’s report to some extent.  
 
In reply to question number 10 put to him u/s 
342 Cr.P.C., the appellant stated that some time 
before his arrest by the local police as suspect, PW 
Ghulam Abbas (Councilor) extorted money from his 
parents, he was released by the police on the same 
day being innocent. However, he quarreled with 
Ghulam Abbas (PW), when the latter refused to 
return the money and threatened him of dire 
consequences and why he became witness against 
him in the case.  
(a) 
First we will take up the last seen evidence 
provided by the above two witnesses. Both are 
related to the complainant and are frequent visitors 
to his residence, also sharing occasions of joys and 
mourning but they kept mum for more than a week. 
At the trial, to cover up the delay in giving last seen 
evidence, they introduced an amazing and intriguing 
story of having gone to Islamabad and stayed there 
for about seven days, returned home on 17.06.2002 
at night. They came to know about the incident on 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
6 
their return, however, they went to the complainant 
the following morning and told him that they had 
seen the deceased in the company of the appellant 
on 10.06.2002. Amjad Ali admitted that he is not on 
good terms with the appellant. He claimed that he 
along with Muhammad Siddique was proceeding to 
the house of one Javed at the relevant time when 
they saw the deceased in the company of the 
appellant, however, the said Javed was neither cited 
as a witness nor produced at the trial to corroborate 
their claim of visit to his house at evening time on 
10.06.2002. His evidence was very crucial to support 
their version but he was withheld for no good 
reason. Again no fare ticket of transport/ travel or 
any other document about stay in a hotel or at any 
other place at Islamabad for such a long period was 
produced. They did no business at Islamabad. This is 
a big question mark, for which they had no plausible 
answer, thus the evidentiary worth of their evidence 
has diminished almost to zero. Thus, their delayed 
statement to police has rendered them false 
witnesses. It has also not been established through 
reliable evidence that at what time the girl was 
ravished and done to death. The distance of the 
place where the deceased was seen with the 
appellant and wherefrom her dead body was 
recovered has remained unexplained, thus, the 
element of close proximity of time and place being a 
fundamental 
and 
mandatory 
requirements 
for 
accepting last seen evidence are absolutely missing. 
Again, it was also not their case that it was their 
routine of passing through the same street regularly, 
hence, they can also be held to be chance witnesses. 
This fat shall give a fatal blow to their testimony.  
Such defective, inadequate and unreliable evidence 
so given is suggestive of creating a suspicious 
appearance leading one to an inference that crude 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
7 
attempts have been made to lead the Court of law to 
a wrong conclusion.  
(b) 
The legal worth of the extra judicial confession 
too is almost equal to naught, keeping in view the 
natural course of events, human behaviour, conduct 
and probabilities, in ordinary course.  
(c) 
Ghulam Abbas (Councilor) in no uncertain 
words has confessed that he was not on good terms 
with the appellant as in the preceding local bodies 
elections, appellant and his family were supporters of 
his rival candidate, therefore, if at all the appellant 
was involved in the crime and was in need of such 
help then, the appropriate person was the rival 
candidate/his family and not Ghulam Abbas (PW). 
The so called venture by the appellant to get the 
help of Ghulam Abbas was fraught with risks. Only a 
blind would perceive such proposition as true. 
Ghulam Abbas(PW) as was expected of him, instead 
of taking a single step or making any effort towards 
the settlement/compromise or to help him readily 
became  a witness against the appellant without 
taking any little pause and stop. This conduct and 
attitude by itself is sufficient for discarding his 
testimony.  
(d) 
Needless 
to 
remark 
that 
extra 
judicial 
confession has never been considered sufficient for 
recording conviction on a capital charge unless it is 
strongly corroborated by tangible evidence coming 
from unimpeachable source therefore, in our view, 
this piece of evidence is entirely insufficient to carry 
conviction on such a charge, more so, when it is 
badly tainted one and appears to be the job of the 
investigating officers who normally indulge in such 
like police chicanery. 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
8 
(e)  The 
recovery 
of 
spread 
sheet 
(Chadar) 
allegedly blood stained at the instance of the 
appellant is also unbelievable because according to 
the prosecution the tragedy commenced and was 
consummated within the compound of uninhabited 
house and even the last seen evidence, which we 
have discarded does not suggest that the appellant 
was carrying the said chadar/sheet when they 
allegedly saw him in the company of the deceased. 
No 
earthly 
reason 
existed 
for 
keeping 
this 
incriminating article by the appellant in his house for 
days more so, when the blood thereon could be 
easily washed away. It appears to us of having been 
planted and fabricated piece of evidence. The same 
squarely deserves to be rejected.   
(f) 
The opinion of the lady doctor is only 
confirmatory which does not tell the name of the 
culprit but just confirms the cause of death and 
sexual assault, made on the deceased girl. Once the 
recovery of spread sheet (chadar) is disbelieved then 
Chemical Examiner’s report is also rendered of no 
intrinsic worth.  
(g) 
In view of the above sketchy and shaky 
evidence leaving behind much to be debated upon 
and when fabrication of the same cannot be ruled 
out altogether, then by applying the universal 
principle, it is a case of no evidence which cannot 
stand the test laid down in the cases of Fazal Elahi v. 
The Crown (PLD 1953 FC 214),  Muhammad Fayyaz 
v. The State (PLD 1984 SC 455), MD Nazir Hossain 
Sarkar v. The State (1969 SCMR 388) and Mst. 
Sairan v. The State(PLD 1970 SC 56) and the entire 
structure of the case crumbled down to the ground.  
(h) 
In the case of Fazal Elahi Khan Hon’ble Mr. 
Justice Abdul Rasheed, Chief Justice, while speaking 
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
9 
for the Full Bench consisting of Mr. Justice A.S.M. 
Akram and Justice A.R. Cornelius (late) laid down 
principle of extra ordinary caution for guidance of the 
courts to be followed while recording conviction on 
the basis of circumstantial evidence. The relevant 
para is reproduced below:- 
“In cases which like the present rest entirely on 
circumstantial evidence, it is of the utmost importance 
that such a circumstance should be ascertained with 
minute care, before, any conclusion or inference adverse 
to the accused person is drawn. 
 
In the ordinary case, this Court is content to 
accept findings of fact reached in the High Court. The 
present 
case, 
however, 
rests 
on 
nothing 
but 
circumstantial evidence, i.e. evidence relating directly to 
a number of minor facts, which facts, the prosecution 
regarded as sufficient, in the total absence of direct 
evidence, to sustain an inference that Fazal Elahi 
murdered Jamal Din. It may be conceded that “a 
concurrence 
of 
well-authenticated 
circumstance 
composes a stronger ground of assurance than positive 
testimony, 
unconfirmed 
by 
circumstances, 
usually 
affords” (Paley). Nevertheless, where the direct evidence 
relates only to minor facts, and consequently, the case 
rests wholly on circumstantial evidence, it is necessary 
to remember that ‘processes of inference and deduction 
are essentially involved, frequently of a delicate and 
perplexing, character, liable to numerous causes of 
fallacy” (Wills on Circumstantial Evidence).  This danger 
points the need for caution in accepting proof regarding 
any one of the purpose of drawing inferences therefrom. 
A mere concurrence of circumstances, some or all of 
which are supported by defective or inadequate 
evidence, is apt to create specious appearance, which is 
calculated to lead to fallacious inference. Hence the 
necessity of accepting, as the basis of inferences, only 
such circumstances as are “well-authenticated.” 
 
Where there are indications of design, in the 
preparation of a case resting on circumstantial evidence, 
the Court should be on its guard against the possibility 
of being deliberately misled into false inference.”  
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
10
5. 
  
By now, it is a consistent view that when any 
case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence then, each 
piece of evidence collected must provide all links making 
out one straight chain where on one end its noose fit in the 
neck of the accused and the other end touches the dead 
body. Any link missing from the chain would disconnect 
and break the whole chain to connect the one with the 
other and in that event conviction cannot be safely 
recorded and that too on a capital charge. As was held in 
the case of Fazal Elahi (ibid) and in view of the changed 
social norms and standard of ethics of the society, to which 
the witnesses belong and also the questionable credibility 
of the investigating agency and its incompetency to 
professionally investigate such blind crimes, by now, the 
Courts have to exercise more and more cautions before 
accepting and resting its opinion of being guilty on a 
circumstantial 
evidence 
collected 
apparently 
in 
a 
dishonest, dubious and rough manner.  
6. 
 
Therefore, we are left with no option but to 
adopt the same care and caution, keeping in view the 
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, which cannot 
be put apart from the one, cited above.  
7. 
 
With all respects to the Bench of the learned 
Federal Shariat Court, these precautions and judicial care 
so required, was not observed and view of the trial Judge 
with regard to the guilt of the appellant was endorsed by 
it. Thus, the approach to the evidence in the case was not 
in accord with the principle since lon well settled.    
Cr.Sh.A7/11 
Crl.Sh.A.26/11 
11
8. 
 
 Accordingly, while extending benefit of doubt 
to the appellant, this appeal is allowed and the appellant 
Imran @ Dully is acquitted of all the charges, leveled 
against him by setting aside his conviction and all 
sentences awarded to him. He be set free forthwith if not 
required in any other case.  
9. 
  
In view of our above findings, Criminal Shariat 
Appeal No.26(S)/09 titled Farzand Ali v. Imran @ Dulli etc. 
has become infructous and is dismissed.  
 
  
Chairman  
 
 
Member  
 
 
Member  
 
 
 Member  
 
 
Member  
 
Announced on 13.11.2014 at Islamabad  
 
 
 
 
Member