BILAL AHMAD vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Bilal Ahmad against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which upheld his conviction and death sentence under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Mst. Rabia Bibi. The core legal question revolves around the reliability of interested eyewitness testimony and the necessity of corroborative evidence in a capital case where the prosecution witnesses are close relatives of the deceased. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the circumstances of the case, including the relationship of the witnesses and the absence of certain corroborative pieces of evidence like a crime empty, warrant a re-appraisal of the prosecution evidence to meet the ends of justice. The key principle laid down is that where prosecution evidence in a criminal trial is primarily interested and partial, the testimony requires careful scrutiny and adequate corroboration to sustain a capital conviction.
- Whether the testimony of interested and related witnesses requires independent corroboration in a murder trial?
- Can leave to appeal be granted to re-appraise prosecution evidence in a capital case?
- Does the absence of a crime empty affect the reliability of the prosecution's case in a murder charge?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J.---On 7th of February, 1991 at 2-00 p.m., a case under section 302, P.P.C., was registered against Bilal Ahmad (petitioner) on the statement of Habib Ullah with Police Station Zahir Pir District Rahimyar Khan for the murder of Nest. Rabia Bibi. The complainant is a resident of Basti Zimindara. His di Ighter, Mst. Rabia Bibi (deceased) was married with Abdul Hadi 15/16 years ago. She gave birth to a daughter, Parveen aged about 6/7 years. Abdul Hadi had been living in Saudi Arabia. Mst. Rabia Bibi was living with her daughter in the said locality. Abdul Hadi is the step brother of the petitioner. He lived in the same Ihata where Mst. Rabia was living. At about 1-00 p.m.
2. On the day of incident, Habib Ullah, his son Jamil Akhtar and Saif Ullah alongwith their women-folk were working in their nearby fields. Bilal Ahmad called Mst. Rabia Bibi in his room and caught her in order to commit rape with her. The woman did not oblige and as such, the petitioner fired and killed her in cold blood. Habib Ullah, Jamil Akhtar and Saif Ullah saw the occurrence. The accused ran away with his weapon. A learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khanpur vide his judgment, dated 17th of April, 1993 convicted and sentenced him to death under section 302, P.P.C. Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence by filing appeal. On 6-6-1995, a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the death sentence of the petitioner. The petitioner was also ordered to pay Rs,50,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased or in default to suffer six months S.I. This petition seeking leave to appeal has been instituted.
3. Learned counsel submits that there was no trustworthy evidence on record to justify the conviction and sentence of the petitioner. Habib Ullah P.W.1 is the father while Saif Ullah P.W.2 is the brother of the deceased. Prosecution evidence is interested and partial. Their testimony, therefore, needed corroboration which was missing in this case. No crime empty could be recovered as a substantial piece of circumstantial evidence, According to the learned counsel, it would, in deed, be hard to believe that on such an odd hour, the petitioner would venture to catch the lady to fulfil his sexual lust. No serious efforts were made to apprehend the petitioner nor he was hotly chased by the P.Ws.
4. This is a case of first impression. In such a situation, leave is granted in order to re-appraise the prosecution evidence to meet the ends of justice.