LAHORE: The Lahore High Court held that a finding of guilt against an accused person cannot be based merely on the high probabilities and if the prosecution fails to discharge its said obligation to prove its case the benefit of that doubt is to be given to the accused person as of right, not as of concession.
The court accepting an appeal of Muhammad Imran alias Amanat Ali alias Maani set aside the convictions and sentences awarded to him by the trial court and extended the benefit of the doubt acquitted him of the charge level against him.
The court observed mere conjectures and probabilities cannot take the place of proof and ordered to release the appellant from jail forthwith if not required to be kept therein in connection with any other case.
The court said the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond the shadow of doubt rather the shadows of doubt are looming in this case. The court added that the finding as regards his guilt should be rested surely and firmly on the evidence produced in the case and the plain inferences of guilt that may irresistibly be drawn from that evidence.
The prosecution is under obligation to prove its case against the accused person at the standard of proof required in criminal cases, beyond reasonable doubt standard, and cannot be said to have discharged this obligation by producing evidence that merely meets the preponderance of probability, the court said.
If a case is decided merely on high probabilities regarding the existence or non-existence of a fact to prove the guilt of a person, the golden rule of giving “benefit of doubt” to an accused person, which has been a dominant feature of the administration of criminal justice in this country with the consistent approval of the constitutional courts, will be reduced to a naught, the court concluded.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.