Acquittal 295-B | The Supreme Court acquitted the accused in the desecration of the Holy Quran case because there were serious flaws in the investigation, such as inconsistencies in evidence, the mention of "matches" being added later, and the lack of details on the identity of the recovered verses. . 2024 S C M R 548


	The Supreme Court acquitted the accused in the desecration of the Holy Quran case because there were serious flaws in the investigation, such as inconsistencies in evidence, the mention of "matches" being added later, and the lack of details on the identity of the recovered verses. .		2024 S C M R 548

1. الزام: ملزم پر قرآن پاک کی آیات کو جلانے کا الزام

تھا

2. تحقیقات میں خامیاں: تفتیش میں سنگین خامیاں پائی گئیں، جیسے کہ "ماچس" کا ذکر بعد میں شامل کیا گیا

3. ثبوت میں تضاد: شکایت کنندہ کی ابتدائی شکایت اور برآمدگی کے میمو میں ماچس کا ذکر نہیں تھا؛ میمو کے سرخی میں یہ لفظ مختلف قلم سے لکھا گیا

4. آیات کی شناخت: برآمد شدہ آیات کی مخصوص شناخت فراہم نہیں کی گئی، جیسے سورت یا آیت کا حوالہ

5. عدالتی فیصلہ: سپریم کورٹ نے تفتیش کو غیر معیاری قرار دیتے ہوئے ملزم کو بری کر دیا، کیونکہ استغاثہ جرم ثابت کرنے میں ناکام رہا۔

2024 S C M R 548

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Yahya Afridi, JJ

MUHAMMAD ZAFRAN---Appellant

Versus

The STATE---Respondent

Criminal Appeal No. 597 of 2018, decided on 3rd April, 2019^*.

(On appeal against the judgment dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Criminal Appeal No. 27-J of 2013)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----S. 295-B---Defiling of Holy Quran---Reappraisal of evidence---Serious lapses in investigation---Allegation against the accused was that he was found burning verses of the Holy Quran---There are serious lapses on the part of the investigating officer; for instance, the "machis" or matchbox has been introduced at a later stage, which appears to have been done to strengthen the prosecution's case---Strikingly, neither the initial written complaint of complainant, nor the proceedings recorded by the police official on the written complaint mentions the "machis" or matchbox---Similarly, the body of the recovery memo, which was stated to have been prepared at the spot, does not mention the "machis" or a matchbox---In fact, the word "machis" appears to have been inserted at a later stage, and that too, only on the heading of the recovery memo, and not in the body thereof, while other recovered items have clearly been mentioned therein---Furthermore, on closer examination of the said recovery memo, it was noted that the word "machis" has been written with a different pen---To compound the above investigational transgressions, the complainant, has, in his evidence, not mentioned the recovery of the "machis" or matchbox from the accused at the place of the crime---This being so, the prosecution has not been able to prove: firstly, the willful act of the accused; and secondly, that he was burning the verses of the Holy Qur'an at the time of his arrest---No specific description of the verses of the Holy Qur'an has been made at any stage of the proceedings---Complainant in his written complaint, recovery witnesses in their statements recorded under section 161 of the Cr.P.C., the recovery memo, and even all of the prosecution witnesses remained silent about the description of the recovered verses of the Holy Qur'an---Verses of the Holy Qur'an, which, as per prosecution, were alleged to have been recovered at the place of occurrence, should have had an identifiable description to a degree of certainty dispelling any doubt---Holy Qur'an has an identifiable description in the form of any of its 30 Paraas, 114 Surahs and 6666 Ayats---Lack of description of the recovered verses of the Holy Qur'an raises serious doubts about what was actually recovered from the place of occurrence, and thereby renders its very admissibility in legal peril---For a serious offence the investigation was not at par with what was required keeping in view the nature of the offence, and the severity of the punishment prescribed therefor---Appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence of accused were set aside, and he was acquitted of the charge framed against him.

Zulifqar and another v. The State 1970 PCr.LJ 47 and Hayatullh v. State 2018 SCMR 2092 ref.

Saghir Ahmed Qadri, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.

Ch. Muhammad Sarwar Sidhu, Additional P.G. for the State.

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.