The Sindh High Court (SHC) has recently set aside the life imprisonment sentence of man in the murder case of his wife observing that the prosecution had failed to prove charges.
The appellant, Saleh Mohammad, was sentenced to life imprisonment by an additional district and sessions court Malir for committing the murder of his wife Asia in October 2019. According to the prosecution, the appellant had committed the murder by causing a blow to her with a hard blunt substance.
A counsel for the appellant submitted that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against him and the conviction was based on misappraisal of the evidence. The state counsel, however, supported the trial court order and requested the high court to dismiss the appeal.
A single bench of the SHC headed by Justice Irshad Ali Shah after hearing the arguments and perusal of the evidence observed that the appellant had informed the complainant that his wife had fallen on the ground and died.
The high court observed that one prosecution witness had disclosed that she found that the deceased had sustained certain injuries and obtained her photographs. The bench observed that by producing such photographs, an impression was given by the witness that the deceased had died an unnatural death due to torture.
The SHC observed that the medical officer had deposed that the injuries on the dead body of the deceased could possibly be on account of her fall on the ground and there was no bony fracture.
The high court observed that neither the complainant nor any of his witnesses had actually seen the appellant committing the murder, therefore, their evidence was not enough to base conviction.
The SHC observed that the investigation officer (IO) had deposed that the appellant admitted to his guilt before him, which led to the recovery of a rolling pin which was allegedly used in the commission of the crime.
The bench observed that the rolling pin was found broken and if for the sake of arguments, it was believed that such admission was actually made by the appellant, even then same in terms of the Article 39 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, could not be used against him as evidence.
The SHC observed that the IO of the case had admitted in a report that the appellant had taken the deceased to different hospitals and If it was so, the contention of the appellant’s counsel that the deceased woman had sustained injuries on account of her fall on the ground and the appellant attempted to save her life could not be lost sight of.
The high court observed that the complainant and his witnesses had declared the appellant to be innocent in the police report by filing such statements on stamp papers. The bench observed that such piece of evidence had been withheld by the prosecution, which obviously had prejudiced the appellant in his defence seriously.
The bench observed that it would be unsafe to maintain the conviction on the basis of the sole recovery of a rolling pin and obviously the prosecution had not been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt. The SHC set aside the trial court order acquitting the appellant from charges and ordered his release, if not required in other cases.