Muhammad Rafique V. The State,
YLR 2025 169 · Balochistan High Court
This case involved an appeal by a man named Muhammad Rafique, who had been convicted in connection with the murder of the complainant's nephew. According to the prosecution, the deceased was shot by one co-accused, while Rafique and others were allegedly present as part of an unlawful assembly. Three eyewitnesses testified, but their accounts showed that Rafique himself was unarmed and did not cause any injury to the victim.
The court noted that two other co-accused, facing identical allegations based on the same evidence, had already been acquitted and given the benefit of the doubt. It held that evidence disbelieved for some accused cannot suddenly become credible against another accused in the same trial. The alleged motive—a dispute over the deceased visiting his father-in-law's house before marriage—was also found unproven, as the witnesses' accounts were inconsistent and improbable. Additionally, the trial court had relied on evidence that was never properly put to the accused during his statement under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code, denying him a chance to explain it.
The High Court also emphasized that mere presence at a crime scene, without any proven common intention or overt act, cannot justify convicting someone under principles of shared or vicarious liability.
Concluding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the High Court acquitted Rafique and allowed his appeal, reinforcing important safeguards against convictions based on weak or inconsistent evidence.
یہ مقدمہ محمد رفیق نامی ایک شخص کی اپیل سے متعلق تھا جسے مدعی کے بھتیجے کے قتل کے سلسلے میں مجرم قرار دیا گیا تھا۔ استغاثہ کے مطابق، مقتول کو ایک شریک ملزم نے گولی مار کر قتل کیا تھا، جبکہ رفیق اور دیگر افراد مبینہ طور پر ایک غیر قانونی مجمع کے حصے کے طور پر موقع پر موجود تھے۔ تین عینی شاہدین نے گواہی دی، لیکن ان کے بیانات سے یہ ظاہر ہوا کہ رفیق خود غیر مسلح تھا اور اس نے مقتول کو کوئی زخم نہیں پہنچایا تھا۔
عدالت نے نوٹ کیا کہ دو دیگر شریک ملزمان، جن پر اسی شہادت کی بنیاد پر بالکل یکساں الزامات عائد تھے، پہلے ہی بری کیے جا چکے تھے اور انہیں شک کا فائدہ دیا گیا تھا۔ عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ جو شہادت کچھ ملزمان کے خلاف ناقابلِ اعتبار قرار دی جا چکی ہو، وہ اچانک اسی مقدمے میں کسی اور ملزم کے خلاف قابلِ اعتبار نہیں بن سکتی۔ مبینہ محرک—یعنی مقتول کے شادی سے پہلے اپنے سسر کے گھر