SCMR 2020

2020 PLP 685 (SCMR)

ARFAN AKRAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Jail Petition No. 1 of 2016, decided on 3rd March, 2020.
Honorable Judges
Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2020 PLP 685 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ
Parties ARFAN AKRAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 685 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 685 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 685 (SCMR) (ARFAN AKRAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Nemo for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

(Against judgment dated 02.11.2015 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. Appeal No. 243 of 2011 and M.R. No. 133 of 2011)

S. 302(b)

Qatl-i-amd

Reappraisal of evidence

Incident was reported with remarkable promptitude

Occurrence that took place at 11:00 a.m., was reported to the police 45 minutes thereafter, and autopsy was conducted at 5:00 p.m.

Such durations synchronized with the point of time reflected in the crime report

Complainant, who was deceased lady's real son and inmate of the same premises was a natural witness by all standards; his evidence was duly corroborated by another witness

On all the salient features of the case as well as details collateral therewith, both said witnesses were consistent, straight-forward and confidence inspiring, and even otherwise, they had no axe to grind against the accused

Accused being son-in-law of deceased and brother-in-law of complainant could not be conceivably swapped as a scapegoat

Forensic reports were in the positive

Solitary fire shot was consistent with the weapon recovered and found wedded with the casing dispatched before arrest of accused

Accused's absence from law for a considerable span of time heavily militated against the position taken by him during the trial

Wife of accused, who was a common link with the deceased, was the best person to vindicate the position of accused, but she was conspicuously absent during the trial

Conviction and sentence of accused, as modified by the High Court, were maintained

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. M. Usman, Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab for the State.

Judgment & Decree

QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.

Irshad Bibi, 62, was shot dead at 11:00 a.m. on 26.1.2009, outside the threshold of her home, located within the precincts of Police Station Tandlianwala, District Faisalabad by Irfan Akram, petitioner, no other than her son-in-law; incident was reported 11:45 p.m. at the spot by her son Shakil Ahmed (PW-7). It was alleged that armed with a .30 caliber pistol, the petitioner persuaded the deceased to sell her residential enclave to apportion the proceed thereof with him; she declined the suggestion at the cost of her life. Arrested on 27.10.2009, the petitioner pursuant to a disclosure led to the recovery of a .30 caliber pistol, found wedded with the casing secured from the spot, dispatched for forensic analysis earlier to his arrest. A learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 3.2.2010 returned a guilty verdict; he was sentenced to death under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860; altered by the High Court into imprisonment for life vide impugned judgment dated 2.11.2015, vires whereof are being assailed through a jail petition, filed with a delay of 23 days, condoned with a view to ensure safe administration of criminal justice.

2. We have examined the entire record with the assistance of the learned Law Officer to discover that the incident was reported with a remarkable promptitude. Occurrence took place at 11:00 a.m., reported to the police 45 minutes thereafter; autopsy conducted at 5:00 p.m. cannot be viewed as delayed; durations mentioned therein synchronize with the point of time reflected in the crime report. Shakil Ahmed (PW-7), deceased's real son and inmate of the same premises is a natural witness by all standards; his evidence is duly corroborated by Munawar Hussain (PW-8). On all the salient features of the case as well as details collateral therewith, we have found them consistent, straightforward and confidence inspiring; even otherwise, seemingly they do not have an axe to grind. On the contrary, petitioner being a brother-in-law could not be conceivably swapped as a scapegoat. Forensic reports are in the positive. Solitary fire shot is consistent with the weapon recovered and found wedded with the casing dispatched before arrest. Petitioner's absence from law for a considerable span of time heavily militates against the position taken by him during the trial; his wife Raheela Bibi, a common link with the deceased, was the best person to vindicate his position; she is conspicuous by her absence from the scene. Prosecution successfully drove home the charge to the hilt and we have not been able to find out any space to admit any hypothesis other than petitioner's guilt. Scales are in balance with wages conscionable in circumstances. Petition fails. Leave declined. MWA/A-9/SC Petition dismissed.