The Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted three men in a 15-year-old murder case, overturning a Lahore High Court decision and highlighting serious flaws in police investigations across Punjab.
The apex court set aside the Lahore High Court’s January 9, 2017 judgment. It ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
A three-member bench heard the matter. The bench included Justice Hashim Kakar, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim. Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim wrote a detailed 10-page verdict.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court raised strong concerns about investigation methods used in murder cases in Punjab. It observed that investigators often follow routine and stereotypical approaches. According to the court, police frequently create unrealistic stories to implicate multiple accused in one incident.
The verdict stated that such narratives are sometimes “not humanly possible.” The court warned that these practices weaken criminal prosecutions and undermine justice.
The court also rejected the prosecution’s reliance on eyewitness testimony. It declared the witnesses’ oral accounts unreliable and unconvincing. The bench noted that during a shooting incident, it is not possible for witnesses to accurately identify which accused fired the fatal bullet.
The case dates back to December 17, 2010. Ghulam Sarwar was shot dead in Lodhran district. The prosecution claimed that all three accused were present and opened fire together.
In September 2011, a trial court sentenced two accused to death. The third accused received life imprisonment. Later, the Lahore High Court converted the death sentences into life terms but upheld the convictions.
However, the Supreme Court found major weaknesses in the prosecution’s case. It observed that medical evidence did not fully support the eyewitness version. The court also pointed out serious contradictions in witness statements.
The recovery of the alleged weapon and empty shell was also declared doubtful. The court said this further damaged the credibility of the prosecution’s story.
The bench concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the presence of witnesses at the crime scene. It also failed to prove the commission of the offence beyond doubt.
Granting the benefit of doubt, the court acquitted Munir Ahmed, Zulfiqar alias Kala, and Naseer Ahmed.
In other related news also read Explosion Hits Supreme Court Building
The judgment reaffirmed a key legal principle. It stated that even a single reasonable doubt is enough to acquit an accused in a criminal case.
