SHA 2520

ISLAMIC CRIMNAL LAW

CASE REVIEW
of
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD v THE STATE

Name : Muhamad Zaqquan Bin Abdul Latib

Matric No. : 1128589
Lecturer : Ustaz Hamid Jusoh

Name of the case

: MUHAMMAD ARSHAD v State

Citation of the case : MUHAMMAD ARSHAD v State PLD 2011 Supreme Court 350
Court : Supreme Court of Pakistan
Judges : Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary,C.J.,Ghulam Rabbani and Khalil-ur-Rehman
Ramday,JJ
Parties of the case:
i.
ii.

Appellant : MUHAMMAD ARSHAD and others

Respondent : THE STATE and others

Issues of the case :

1.Whether the occurance had taken place in the manner alleged by prosecution or in the manner
claimed by Munir(accused)?
2.Whether the two eye-witnesses had any believeable motive to falsely implicate the four
convicted accused?
3.Whether evidence presented by Investigating Officer could be taken to be part of evidence by
the virtue of exceptions envisaged by Arts. 59 to 65 Qanun-e-Shahadat,1984?
Judgement of the judges:
Order accordingly the convicted accused sentenced for life imprisonment together with any
other sentence of imprisonment awarded to each or anyone of them.
Criminal Appeal No.119 of 2008 is dismissed.
Reason of judgement/argument of the counsel:
a. The said accused in this case were convicted and sentenced to death for murder of four
persons on the dispute of possession of land.Therefore,it was being argued by the counsel
regarding the validity of possession of land by claimant.In the trial,Halqa Patwari and
another prosecution witnesses admitted during evidence that the actual physical
possession of venue of occurrence was not delivered to complainant party and it were
admitted that the three accused were in possession a part of the land in question as tenants
of remaining accused even on the day of occurrence.On the day of occurrence,
complainant party was not in actual possession and doubt existed about status of the
complainant over the land and about accused person having mounted a violent and
murderous assault to dispossesses them of the same;as such doubt crept into the matter

and had escaped notice of Trial Court and High Court.The judges contended that it were
unsafe to order death for four accused.Therefore,the Supreme Court maintained the
conviction of the accused persons under Ss.302(b) and 149 of Pakistan Penal Code but
altered sentence of death into imprisonment for life on four counts and it tobe run
concurrently.
b. It could be said that there could be any ill-will developed between parties regarding the
dispute of the land and the occurrence happened on the said land.However,it could be
added that the complainant would not be reasonably believable to have vengeance over
the accused as complainant victory in litigation.It was accepted by the court that two eyewitnesses could be present at the place of occurrence at relevant time.It was Yaqoob
(P.W.7);brother of the deceased Sharif,carried the deceased to the hospital.It was
contended that if three real brothers who had special interest in the land could be present
at the time of occurrence at the said land,it would be reasonably claim that fourth brother
Liaqat (P.W.8) to be present.There is nothing brought on record to establish that both
eye-witnesses had any reason to maliciously involve the four convicts in the occurrence
in question.It was hold by the Supreme Court that the said eye-witnesses were natural and
independent witnesses of the occurrence and no exception could be taken to the reliance
place by the said two leraned Courts in their testimony.
c. The application of exceptions in Qanun-e-Shahadat specifically varying from Arts.59 to
65 which accepts even some opinions as evidence must be made from a person to be
Experts.Investigating Officer cannot be accepted to be part of expert.Even under
law,opinion of Investigating Officer is not admissible as evidence.This neither mentioned
in Criminal Procedure Code 1898.Under S.4(1)(m) of Criminal Procedure Code,oath only
can be taken in judicial proceeding and Investigation was not judicial
proceeding.Besides,under Criminal Procedure Code,there is no provision authorizes or
allow Investigating Officer to form opinions about guilt or innocence of accused which is
purely judicial function performable only by a court of law and Qanun-e-Shahadat not
recognizes opinion of Investigating Officers as admissible in evidence.

Personal opinion:
We are indeed seeking for justice in every kind of offences done by peoples.This case one was
one of the many that showing how the justice should be preserved accordance to the justice and
law.What is being mentioned and contended by the judges in this case showed us how we should
be fair even with the accused for slightest doubt existed upon them.Besides,to ensure the law and
justice well-protected,it was such an honor that the said judges in this case have keen intutition to
justified every evidence produced before the court.I am agreed with the decision of the judges as
and found that it was such a fair justice for all parties involved in this case.I think it was not easy
to be justice in order to serve peoples who are seeking justice befor the court.Sometimes,there
were some peoples who actually pretending to be in fault in gaining favor of their
party.Somehow,judges in this case could look out thoroughly the case from the trial court till it
be presented before the Supreme Court of Pakistan.As regard matter of fairness,Islam have
underline the elements and conditions that need to be observed so that the accused party were not
wrongly sentenced.The evidence given also should be observed properly as to its authenticity
and validility to be admitted as evidence before the court.This case have shown how evidence
especially regarding the oath undertaken by any person to be valid and accepted as part of the
evidence.Qanun-e-Shahadat as being discussed in this case have made an exception to certain
circumstances for accepting expert opinion regarding any matters-related to be admissible as
evidence before the court.Judges contended that the evidence produce before them was not valid
as it was not included in the exceptions.We might have seen how the judges carefully determine
the case and its evidence to come out with good decision.As saying goes,better acquit 10 person
who is guilty than convict 1 innocent person.This really served purpose of justice in this
case.What can be concluded,I seen this case was thoroughly justified by the judges and I found
this case do really served the purpose of law as mechanism for justice to mankind based
conditions and elements guided in Quran and Sunnah.