IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED  
 
Criminal Appeal No.185/2006  
and Jail Petition No.694/2018 
(On appeal from the judgment dated 13.6.2005 of the High Court of Sindh, Karahi 
passed in ATA No.3/2004) 
 
 
Waqar A. Shamsi 
(Criminal Appeal No.185/2006)  
Muhammad Arshad 
(Jail Petition No.694/2018) 
 
 
 
 
 
… Petitioner(s) 
Versus 
The State 
(in both cases)  
   
 
 
 
… Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s) 
: Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
(in Criminal Appeal No.185/2006)  
Nemo. 
(in Jail Petition No.694/2018) 
 
 
For the State 
: Ch. Aamir Rehman, 
Additional Attorney General 
 
Mr. Khadim Hussain,  
Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 14.10.2019. 
 
 
JUDGMENT 
  
 
 
  
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.- Hafiz Muhammad Umar, 
18, resident of Phase-VI, D.H.A. Karachi, a student of Saint Andrew 
School , left home in the morning of fateful day i.e. 16-9-2003 to attend 
the school; he did not return at the expected point of time whereupon his 
brother Muhammad Faisal (PW-1)  inquired from his friend Waqar Ali 
Shamsi, appellant herein, on a cell phone, albeit with no information; in 
the meanwhile, the complainant received a phone call; the anonymous 
caller claimed custody of Hafiz Muhammad Umar while demanding 
ransom for his release. CPLC, (Citizen Public Liaison Committee) was 
taken on board whereafter the incident was formally reported at 8:00 
p.m. A supplementary statement, on the following day, divulged further 
details of communication between the captor and the abductee on the 
Criminal Appeal No.185/2006 and Jail Petition No.694/2018 
2
basis whereof, the appellants were arrayed as suspects alongside Imran 
Masih alias Raja, since absconder. Waqar Ali Shamsi appellant was 
taken into custody; pursuant to a disclosure, he led the police party 
alongside witnesses to a premises, occupied by the absconder under 
rent, wherefrom the dead body of Hafiz Muhammad Umar was found, 
bundled in a sack; as the investigation progressed, Muhammad Arshad 
petitioner was arrested on 20-9-2003; the accused were finally sent to 
trial as juveniles; the trial culminated into their conviction vide judgment 
dated 15.1.2004; they were sentenced for homicide, abduction for 
ransom and terrorism, findings upheld by the learned High Court with 
extension of benefit of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 
1898, vide impugned judgment dated 13-6-2005, being assailed by the 
convicts; leave has been granted in Criminal Appeal No.185 of 2016 filed 
by Waqar Ali Shamsi, clubbed with Jail Petition No.694 of 2018 filed by 
Muhammad Arshad; with a common thread, these are being decided 
through this single judgment. 
2. 
 
  For convicts, it is argued that prosecution failed to adduce 
sufficient evidence to positively link them with the crime and that entire 
case is structured upon a misplaced and misconceived suspicion, 
aspects that escaped notice by the courts below. The learned Additional 
Attorney General assisted by Additional Prosecutor General Sindh 
faithfully defended the impugned judgments; by referring to various 
pieces of evidence, they maintained that there existed sufficient evidence, 
usually procurable in the cases of like nature, to frame the accused with 
the charge by excluding every hypothesis of their innocence.  
3. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
4. 
 
Calamity strikes by surprise; people seldom fall prey to 
crimes under ideal circumstances, therefore, it would be unrealistic to 
insist for or expect choice uniform pieces of evidence in every criminal 
case; what is to be essentially seen is that whether prosecution was able 
to come forward with the available evidence, possible under the 
circumstances of the case and that whether such a volume or nature of 
evidence is sufficient to sustain the charge. In the present case, the 
complainant, deceased’s brother, unsuspectingly sought information 
from Waqar Ali Shamsi appellant, being a fast friend, expected to know 
the whereabouts; as the investigation geared up, he made his breast 
clean, reaching out to the deceased and, thus prosecution was able to 
constitute a chain of circumstances, link by link, through last seen 
evidence, occupation of premises, recovery of electric wire and ropes, 
Criminal Appeal No.185/2006 and Jail Petition No.694/2018 
3
employed by the culprits to cause death confirmed as 
asphyxial and, thus argument that there was no evidence for a guilty 
return does not hold much water. Devastated family residing in an 
affluent neighbourhood had no axe to grind against the appellant, 
deceased’s best friend, to swap him with the real offender; his exclusive 
knowledge is a piece of evidence inexorably pointed upon his culpability; 
web of circumstances is equally hovering over the guilt of Muhammad 
Arshad petitioner as well; they cannot escape the consequences of 
deceased’s murder on the strength of bald denials, supported by 
inconsequential defence furnished by their well-wishers; their convictions 
as well as sentences consequent thereupon for an offence under Section 
302 (b) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 are maintained, however, we 
have not been able to find out any piece of evidence to frame them with 
the charge of abduction for ransom, even obliquely, as there is no proof 
that communication by the anonymous caller demanding ransom was 
actually made by the convicts; phone data sans positive proof about the 
caller or subscriber of cell phone handset as the calls were made, 
according to prosecution’s own case, from a public calling booth; ransom 
was never transacted, therefore, prosecution case to the extent of 
abduction for ransom is on a stumbling ground; they are acquitted from 
the charge under section 365-A of the Code ibid. Concomitantly, their 
conviction under section 7 (e) is set aside and they are acquitted from the 
charge as well; sentence shall be commuted with the benefit provided 
under Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. With the 
above modification, Criminal Appeal is allowed and the Jail petition is 
converted into appeal with the same consequence.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
  
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
14th October, 2019 
 
JUDGE 
Ghulam Raza/* 
 
 
 
 
