2024 P (PLP)

Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, C.J.

The appellant, Bilal son of Allah Bakhsh, resident of Kunchiti Dasht, was booked in case Crime No.12/2022, registered at Levies Thana Khuddan Dasht on 31.10.2022 in respect of an offence under Section 302/34 P.P.C. and after a regular trial, he was convicted by the trial Court i.e. Sessions Judge, Mekran at Turbat for an offence under Section 302 (b) P.P.C. to suffer life imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousands) to be paid to the legal heirs of deceased Shabir Ahmed and Shahal and in default of payment of compensation amount to further suffer six (6) months S.I., with benefit of Section 382 (b) Cr.P.C.

2. We have heard Mr. Khalil Ahmed Lehri, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sudheer Ahmed, learned Additional Prosecutor General (APG) for the State and also perused the available record,

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and, thus, this appeal warrants acceptance with a resultant acquittal of the appellant. While learned Additional Prosecutor General maintained that prosecution had succeeded in proving the guilt of the appellant to the hilt and, therefore, the present appeal may be dismissed.

4. The facts of the case, as presented by prosecution, establish that the accused Bilal son of Allah Bakhsh, inflicted dagger blows upon the deceased, resulting in their demise. The incident was allegedly witnessed by PW-2 Ahmed and PW-3 Abid Ali, who testified before the Court. Although PW-2 Ahmed was declared hostile during the trial, his cross-examination revealed an admission of commission of the occurrence and a reiteration of his previous statement under section 161 of the code of criminal procedure, wherein he specifically nominated the accused as a sole perpetrator for the crime.

5. The law is well settled that the quality of evidence is of paramount importance, and the testimony of a single, honest, and reliable witness can form the basis of conviction if it transpires confidence and is found to be cogent and free from any blemish or suspicion of being fabricated. In the present case, despite Ahmed initial hostility, his admission during cross-examination lends credence to the prosecution's case. The law is clear that the statement of a hostile witness is to be viewed in the light of the circumstances of the case, and it must be ascertained what truth actually flows from his statement, whether favoring the prosecution or the defense. The evidence of a hostile witness is not to be discarded in its entirety but may be relied upon to the extent that it supports the case of the prosecution. His testimony is weighed along with the cumulative effect of the entire evidence presented. In the case of "Niaz Ahmed v. The State" (PLD 2003 SC 635) the August Supreme Court observed in paragraph 6 that "the law is clear that the statement of a hostile witness to be viewed in the light of the circumstances of the case and thereafter it is to be ascertained as to what truth actually flows from their statement, whether favoring the prosecution or the defense."

6. Furthermore, the accused's confession recorded by PW-4 Noor Bakhsh Mengal, Judicial Magistrate, although retracted, remains a significant piece of evidence. The law stipulates that a retracted confession can form the basis of conviction if it is found to be voluntary and true and is corroborated by other evidence. The record reveals that at the time of recording the statement of PW-4, the thumb impressions of the accused were also taken on the statement of said witness but no request or application was made by the learned counsel for the verification of thumb impressions. It is the duty of a party contending that document does not contain his genuine thumb impression; such party should request court for sending such document for comparison to concerned expert at his expense. Even otherwise, the statement of judicial magistrate shows that he has recorded the statement of accused under section 164 Cr.P.C after observing all the legal formalities.

7. The defense has not been able to discredit the prosecution's evidence or demonstrate any material discrepancies or contradictions that would render the eye-witnesses' accounts unreliable. We are mindful that the benefit of doubt is to be given to the accused, but such benefit is only to be extended when doubts are reasonable and not fanciful. For the aforesaid discussion, the instant appeal is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. The judgment of the trial Court and the appellant for the murder of Shahal and Shabir is maintained. JK/55/Bal. Appeal dismissed