IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.148-L of 2017  
(On appeal from the judgment dated 
12.03.2015 passed by the Lahore High 
Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No.86-J 
of 2011 and C.S.R. No.22-T of 2010). 
 
Asad Rehmat 
 
…Appellant(s) 
 
VERSUS 
The State, etc 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: 
Syed Zahid Hussain Bukhari, ASC 
Ms. Khalida Parveen, ASC 
 
 
 
For the State 
: Mr. Mazhar Sher Awan,  
Additional Prosecutor General, 
Punjab 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 
20.05.2019 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Indicted on 
multiple counts by an Anti Terrorism Court, Asad Rehmat, 
appellant herein, was returned a guilty verdict; he stood convicted 
and sentenced on each vide judgment dated 13.5.2011. A learned 
division bench of Lahore High Court upheld convictions as well as 
sentences vide impugned judgment dated 12.3.2015, vires 
whereof are being assailed through leave of the Court.  
 
The appellant, was required by law in a criminal case as 
accused; on fateful day i.e. 29.3.2011, pursuant to a tip off, a 
contingent of Police Station Sillanwali, surprised the appellant in 
Chak No.136 SB to effect his arrest; he confronted the police party 
from the roof top with a .12 caliber repeater; from amongst the 
contingent, Muhammad Hayat, Sher Ahmed and Ahmed Bakhsh 
were fatally shot. Upon return of fire, the appellant moved to 
different places and in the process targeted Zafar Iqbal, Abdul Haq 
and Muhammad Sarwar, co-villagers; they too succumbed to their 
Criminal Appeal No.148-L of 2017. 
 
 
 
 
 
2 
 
injuries. Witnesses survived the attack when by snatching a 
motorbike, the appellant fled from the scene; he was arrested on 
3.4.2011 with motorbike P-8; upon a disclosure, he led to the 
recovery of .12 caliber repeater P-1 on 10.4.2011. It was found 
wedded with 13 casings secured from the venue during spot 
inspection. The appellant claimed trial; confronted with the 
evidence, took the following position:- 
“Mst. Aasma daughter of Abdul Haq deceased married me 
without consent of her father. After the registration of Nikka 
she was residing with me as my wife happily. Abdul Haq 
had extended threats to me and I had taken my wife to Fort-
Abbas. A false case of abduction was got registered against 
me in connivance with the police. On relevant day i.e. 
29.3.2011 I was not present in my house at Chak No.136 SB 
and Abdul Haq complainant of case FIR No.709/10 along 
with three police officials intruded into my house in my 
absence without any warrants. Womenfolk present in the 
house raised alarm which attracted many persons of my 
family and that of family of Abdul Haq. There had been 
intensive and indiscriminate firing between the parties 
resulting in death of police officials as well as three persons 
from the public. The police officials also fired in confusion and 
their bullets also hit the deceased persons. The local police in 
order to cover up its inefficiency falsely lodged a case against 
me. No person from the public man has supported the 
prosecution version and two police officials have appeared as 
eye witnesses. The case is totally false. As all the police 
officials 
who 
have 
appeared 
before 
this 
Court 
are 
subordinate of complainant and Investigation Officer so they 
have deposed against me falsely. I am innocent.” 
2. 
 
Huge loss of life and apparent preponderance of  
evidence notwithstanding, certain aspects of the prosecution case  
warrant a careful scrutiny. Occurrence, statedly, took place at 
2.00 p.m., autopsies started 4.30 p.m., concluded at 9.00 p.m. 
Muhammad Hayat was examined first; the medical officer noted 
rigor mortis. Same is the case with other corpses. In the month of 
March, development of rigor mortis within such short span of time 
is mind boggling; occurrence does not appear to have taken place 
at the point of time mentioned in the crime report. A contingent, 
armed with sophisticated automatic weapons, reacting promptly 
Criminal Appeal No.148-L of 2017. 
 
 
 
 
 
3 
 
on a sudden information, moving an unusual quick response to 
arrest an accused in a run off criminal case. Single individual 
holding the police party at bay, escaping retaliatory fires, jumping 
from one roof top to another, snatching a motorbike, fleeing 
within the view and reach of a police party with a vehicle is a story 
that may not find a buyer. Motorbike allegedly snatched by 
appellant belonged to a co-villager, Imran Hussain; he was the 
best witness to prove the charge, conspicuously missing in the 
array; same goes for Hayat Bakhsh’s daughter, the alleged 
abductee in the criminal case wherein appellant’s arrest was 
required. Though the casings tallied with the gun, however, these 
were dispatched on a date subsequent to appellant’s arrest and 
thus this piece of evidence also lost its significance. The most 
intriguing aspect of the prosecution case is dimension of injuries 
received by the deceased. Zafar Iqbal, deceased had three wounds 
of entry on his person measuring 5 x 3.5 c.m., 2.5 x 2.5 c.m. and 
3 x 3 c.m. Abdul Haq was noted with two entry wounds 
measuring 2.5 x 0.1 c.m. and .5 x .5 c.m. Muhammad Sarwar had 
two entry wounds measuring 2.5 x 2.5 c.m. and another with 
multiple entries within the radius of 8 x 8 c.m. Muhammad 
Hayat, deceased was noted with five entry wounds; injuries on left 
side of face and head were 14 inch x 10 c.m. it was a crush fire 
arm wound, destroying left eyeball completely. Next is an entry 
wound on left hand measuring 6 x 5 c.m. There are two wounds of 
entry each 1 x 1 c.m. while other 1½ x 1½. These apertures, 
vastly different, unambiguously rule out use of single weapon and 
ammunition. We are surprised by the police failure to secure 
casings ejected from their own weapons, statedly used against the 
appellant. Except the dead, all others miraculously survived the 
assault unscathed. These aspects of the case, in retrospect lend 
credence to the position taken by the appellant. The prosecution 
has not come up with the whole truth and thus its case cannot be 
viewed as beyond reasonable doubt, benefit whereof cannot be 
withheld merely on account of magnitude of violence and loss of 
lives consequent thereupon. Criminal Appeal 148-L/2017 is 
allowed, impugned judgment is set aside. The appellant shall be 
released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Above are the 
Criminal Appeal No.148-L of 2017. 
 
 
 
 
 
4 
 
reasons of our short order of even date which is reproduced as 
under:- 
“For detailed reasons to be recorded later, the instant 
criminal appeal is allowed. The convictions and sentences of 
the appellant Asad Rehmat are set aside. He is acquitted of 
the charges framed against him. He shall be released 
forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other criminal 
case.” 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Lahore, the 
20th of May, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE