Expert evidence insufficient for conviction without corroboration: SC

By Sohail Khan
|
August 17, 2025

A security guard passing by Supreme Court building in Islamabad. — SC website/Fil

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has held that it is generally unsafe to convict an accused solely based on expert evidence without substantial corroboration.

Advertisement

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Athar Minallah and comprising Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan, issued detailed reasons in a murder case. The court acquitted the petitioners, Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sabir, from the charges framed against them by extending the benefit of the doubt. The court set aside the High Court orders dated 26.02.2022 and 16.05.2024, respectively, with the ruling that in case the appellants are not required to be incarcerated in any other case, they shall be released from prison forthwith.

Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sabir had filed petitions in the apex court against the judgment dated 16.05.2024 of the Islamabad High Court. “Since the recovery of the crime weapon is disbelieved due to lack of independent corroboration, the positive report of the firearm expert loses its evidentiary value in connecting the petitioner Muhammad Ramzan to the crime,” states the nine-page detailed judgment authored by Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.

The court held that the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners by the trial court and by the Islamabad High Court were the result of misreading and misappreciation of the evidence available on the record. “It is further concluded that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charge against the petitioners beyond reasonable doubt,” the judgment added. The court, on June 5, 2025, had issued a short order after allowing the appeals and acquitted the appellants Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sabir from the charges framed against them by extending the benefit of the doubt in their favor. Consequently, the court set aside the judgments of the trial court and the High Court and directed the release of appellants unless they are required in any other case.

The court noted that while co-accused Chand was acquitted, both petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge (West), Islamabad (the trial court). The FIR was lodged by complainant Abdul Ayan with Police Station Shalimar, Islamabad, on 28.12.2020, regarding the murder of Nasir Asghar due to firing by an unknown accused who, along with co-accused, had entered the One Dollar Shop, Irfan Plaza, Sector F-10 Markaz, Islamabad.

Muhammad Ramzan was accused of firing the fatal shot with a 30-bore pistol at the deceased Nasir Asghar. Consequently, he was convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and awarded penalty of death. He was to be hanged until death and was also liable to pay compensation of Rs1,000,000. The court noted that accused was also convicted and sentenced under Section 398 PPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years.

Accused Muhammad Sabir was convicted and sentenced under Section 398 PPC to undergo 15 years of rigorous imprisonment. The judgment added that the prosecution had failed to establish the offences against co-accused Chand, hence he was acquitted of the charge. The court further noted that both petitioners challenged their conviction and sentence by filing appeals before the Islamabad High Court, while the complainant filed an appeal against the acquittal of co-accused Chand. The complainant also filed a criminal revision for enhancement of the sentence of convict Muhammad Sabir.

The Islamabad High Court accepted the acquittal appeal filed by the complainant against co-accused Chand and convicted him under Section 390 PPC, and sentenced him to three years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) with a fine of Rs100,000/. The criminal revision for enhancement of Muhammad Sabir’s sentence and the criminal appeal filed by Muhammad Ramzan were dismissed. The death sentence awarded to Muhammad Ramzan was confirmed.

Convict Chand has not challenged his conviction and sentence before the Supreme Court. However, convicts Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Sabir challenged their conviction and sentence by filing petitions through the Superintendent District Jail, Jhang, and the Superintendent Central Jail, Rawalpindi, respectively.

Advertisement