IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Criminal Jail Appeal No.S-12 of 2024
Criminal Appeal No.S-22 of 2024
Sobho Jatoi and others
V/S
The State
Appellants: 1. Sobho son of Nizamuddin.
2. Ahsan son of Nasrullah
3. Niaz alias Niaz Ali son of Bilawal
All by caste Jatoi
Through Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro,
Advocate.
State: Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy
Prosecutor General, Sindh.
Date of Hearing: 05.03.2025
Date of Decision: 17.03.2025
O R D E R
Omar Sial, J.- On 19.12.2020, a woman named Suhailan appeared at the Stuart Ganj police station and told the A.S.I. Hidayatullah Marfani that two men, identified as Sobho, Niaz and Ahsan, had taken her daughter Iqbal to kill her as they suspected that she had a love affair with a man named Mansoor. A police party went to the identified house and saw Sobho, Niaz, Ahsan, and one other leaving the premises with guns in their hands. They, however, managed to escape. The police then saw that the dead bodies of Iqbal and Mansoor were lying on the ground. A man, identified as Abdul Jabbar, who was deceased Mansoor’s father, was standing next to the bodies. F.I.R. No. 149 of 2020 was registered under sections 302, 311 and 34 P.P.C. by A.S.I. Hidayatullah on behalf of the State on 20.12.2020.
2. Sobho, Niaz, Ahsan and Barkat were arrested but professed innocence and claimed to be tried. At the end of the trial, the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur on 27.03.2024 acquitted Barkat but convicted the remaining three accused for offences under section 302(b) and 34 P.P.C. and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional Prosecutor General. None appeared on behalf of the deceased's legal heirs. My observations and findings are as follows.
4. The entire case was built up by the prosecution on two pillars – first, that Suhailan (the deceased girl’s mother) and, second, Abdul Jabbar (the deceased boys’ father) had told A.S.I. Hidayatullah that Sobho and others had killed the couple. At trial, both Abdul Jabbar and Suhailan relented on what they had allegedly told the police and testified that every statement attributed to them was incorrect and that they did not even know who the accused were nor did the police ever record their statements. Although both the witnesses were declared hostile, a feeble and unprofessional cross-examination conducted by the State’s counsel did not help the prosecution’s case. The entire building (which was not much to start with) that the prosecution had built thus collapsed.
5. This is not the first of such cases. Many similar cases have come to this court. The story the police narrates is the same i.e. they receive information that X is going to kill Y on account of honor; a police party reaches the spot inevitably a few minutes after the deed has been done; they see armed men leaving the premises; they can identify all the men even though they do not assert that they knew them from before; the armed men very easily manage to escape from an entire police party in which not even one shot is fired; a man or a woman tells them that X killed Y. The police collect no other evidence and rely on the man or woman’s statement. At trial, the man or the woman testifies that they never saw anything. X goes free for lack of evidence. The story is the same in the present case.
6. Another piece of evidence against the appellants was that the investigating officer found two empty shells at the scene of the incident. The prosecution claimed that the two empty shells matched the gun recovered from Sobho. Police malafide is evident from this. The record reflects that the memo of arrest was not brought on record. The document exhibited as the arrest memo (Exhibit 18-D) only records that a USB was seized. There is no mention of the recovery of a gun. The gun was not produced at trial. The memo of recovery shows that the place of incident was examined on 20.12.2020. According to the investigating officer, he had investigated the site on 21.12.2020. Sobho was arrested according to the record on 27.12.2020 (PW-2 H.C. Nazir Ahmed Kharal) – “on 27.12.2020 accused Sobho was arrested by the S.I.O. Inspector Azad Ali Shaikh in front of me and co-mushir H.C. Mehboob Ali and prepared such mashirnama in front of us”. Inspector Azad in his testimony denied that he had arrested Sobho – “on 23.12.2020 accused Sobho was arrested by A.S.I. Hidayatullah.” To top it all, the maalkhana in charge WHC Bashir Ahmed testified that it was 20.12.2020 when Inspector Azad had given him the gun and cartridges that he had recovered from Sobho in the maalkahana. The contradictions are apparent and do not require any commentary. No credence can be given to the recovery initiated or the credibility of the witnesses. It almost seems that the police facilitated the accused.
7. I am quite simply appalled to see the number of criminal cases coming to court that have arisen out of incidents of alleged honor killings. There is an immense and immediate need for the government to address this issue effectively. Those who kill women on the pretext of honour have the strategy chalked out perfectly. The modus operandi deployed to commit such crime is known well to all in the criminal justice system. Suffice it to say that it ends with an acquittal because the investigator has done zero investigation. There is not a shred of evidence collected. Not an iota. Witnesses who are created resile at trial. Police officers in these cases treat such gender-based violence in a non-serious and arbitrary manner. Investigators must change their mindsets. Courts then have no option but to acquit because a judge must decide on the evidence.
8. Resources must be deployed immediately to train our investigators and make available the finances, knowledge, equipment, training, and expertise to them so a meaningful investigation and collection of evidence is done. An argument given by the prosecutors is that the Sindh police is spread out thin and a large part of the force is engaged in operations against dacoits. The Sindh police’s efforts in that regard are deeply appreciated; however, it must also be kept in mind that honor killings may have much far-reaching consequences for the society and the country at large than the dacoits of this province. Sindh police has some excellent investigators. Their expertise should be used to investigate this crime. Advanced investigation equipment should be procured as a priority. If all this is not done, offenders will keep going free because of lack of evidence. The evil will grow. Mere criminalisation of the offence will not help much if effective policing, investigation, and prosecution are not done. The Sindh government has always had a progressive mindset and has led the country in introducing gender and juvenile based legislation. I do not doubt that it will give this critical issue its immediate attention. The Sindh Prosecutor General must also review the performance of his colleagues prosecuting such cases. Significant prosecution lapses are evident in this case. The Sindh prosecution must end the practice of forwarding challans in all cases, especially in gender-based violence cases, in a mechanical, stereotypical and reckless manner without the application of mind.
9. Given the above, I am left with no option but to allow the appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2024) because no meaningful evidence was produced at trial, and therefore, the prosecution failed to prove its case. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 12 of 2024 was filed before Criminal Appeal 22 of 2024; consequently, it is dismissed as infructuous. The appellants may be released if not required in any other custody case.
10. A copy of this order should be sent to the Sindh Chief Secretary, the Sindh Inspector General of Police and the Sindh Prosecutor General requesting that observations made in paragraphs 7 and 8 be noted.
JUDGE
Manzoor