Nahida Jabeen V. Agha Muhammad and 6 others,
PCrLJ 2020 763 · Balochistan High Court
This case was an appeal by a widow, Nahida Jabeen, against the acquittal of seven men accused of killing her husband and injuring her, her son, and her daughter during an attack with sticks and iron rods. The trial court had acquitted the accused, but the High Court found this decision was wrong and based on a misreading of evidence.
The High Court addressed several issues. First, it ruled that a two-hour delay in filing the police report was not suspicious, since the incident occurred in a remote area under Levies (local police) jurisdiction, and the family had to wait for the officer in charge to arrive before the report could be lodged. Second, the court found the eyewitness accounts of the widow, son, and injured daughter to be consistent, natural, and credible, especially since these witnesses were also injured in the attack, confirming their presence at the scene. Their testimony matched the medical evidence. The court also held that being close relatives of the victim did not automatically make their testimony unreliable, that failure to recover the weapons used did not disprove the prosecution's case, and that proving a motive was not essential when direct eyewitness and medical evidence was strong.
Since no specific witness could say which attacker caused the fatal blow, the court convicted the accused but reduced their sentence to life imprisonment rather than death. This judgment is significant because it reaffirms that appellate courts can reverse acquittals when trial courts ignore solid eyewitness and medical evidence, and clarifies that minor procedural delays or gaps, like late FIR filing or missing weapon recovery,
یہ مقدمہ ایک بیوہ، ناہیدہ جبین، کی اپیل سے متعلق تھا جو ان سات افراد کی بریت کے خلاف دائر کی گئی تھی جن پر لاٹھیوں اور لوہے کی سلاخوں سے حملہ کر کے اس کے شوہر کو قتل کرنے اور اسے، اس کے بیٹے اور بیٹی کو زخمی کرنے کا الزام تھا۔ ٹرائل کورٹ نے ملزمان کو بری کر دیا تھا، لیکن ہائی کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ یہ فیصلہ غلط تھا اور شواہد کو غلط انداز میں پڑھنے پر مبنی تھا۔
ہائی کورٹ نے کئی نکات پر غور کیا۔ پہلا، عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ پولیس رپورٹ درج کرانے میں دو گھنٹے کی تاخیر مشکوک نہیں تھی، کیونکہ واقعہ ایک دور دراز علاقے میں پیش آیا تھا جو لیویز (مقامی پولیس) کے دائرہ اختیار میں آتا تھا، اور رپورٹ درج کرانے سے پہلے خاندان کو ذمہ دار افسر کے آنے کا انتظار کرنا پڑا تھا۔ دوسرا، عدالت نے پایا کہ بیوہ، بیٹے اور زخمی بیٹی کے عینی شاہدین کے بیانات ہم آہنگ، فطری اور قابل اعتماد تھے، خاص طور پر اس لیے کہ یہ گ