Criminal Miscelleneous 433/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Sindh High Court · 2025 · Before Khalid Hussain Shahani

ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA Cr. Misc. A. No. S- 433 of 2024 Date Order with signature of Judge 1. For orders on office objection-A. 2. For hearing of main case. 3. For hearing of MA No.7316/2024. S/A. 05.03.2025. Mr. Aijaz Ali Chandio, advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Nazir Ahmed Bhangwar, DPG for the State. ------------ Khalid Hussain Shahani J . Through the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application, the applicant has challenged the legality and propriety of the orders dated 29.07.2024, passed by the learned 2nd Judicial Magistrate, Mehar, whereby the application filed by the applicant/complainant seeking to restrain the exhumation of the deceased minor, Mst. Aneela Lakhair, the applicant's daughter, was rejected. Additionally, the applicant impugns the order dated 11.12.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mehar, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.49 of 2024, which upheld the previous order. The applicant seeks the annulment of both impugned orders, contending that they suffer from legal infirmities and are contrary to the principles laid down by the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan regarding the exhumation of deceased persons in criminal investigations. 02. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, being the mother of the deceased, is no longer interested in the exhumation of the deceased's body. The record indicates that the orders for exhumation were passed primarily on the basis that Section 311 PPC, along with other provisions, was mentioned in the FIR. The primary purpose of the exhumation was to determine whether the cause of death was homicidal in nature, particularly in light of allegations related to Siahkari. However, in light of the applicant’s disinterest and the absence of any compelling evidence necessitating further inquiry, the learned counsel argues that the exhumation is unwarranted and serves no legal purpose. 03. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh, acknowledges that the applicant, being the complainant, has expressed disinterest in proceeding with the exhumation of the deceased’s body to determine the cause of death. Furthermore, in light of the circumstances and the available record, it is evident that the exhumation process would serve no legal or evidentiary purpose, as no new material facts are likely to emerge that would alter the course of the investigation. The Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan has consistently held that exhumation should only be ordered when there is a compelling reason supported by substantial evidence indicating the necessity of such an inquiry. In the absence of such justification, the process of exhumation is unwarranted and does not serve the interests of justice. 04. The applicant, being the complainant and the mother of the deceased, initially lodged an FIR bearing Crime No.100 of 2024 at Police Station Mehar under Sections 302, 311, and 34 PPC, alleging Qatl-e-Amd against the accused and requesting the exhumation of the deceased's body for postmortem examination, as no such procedure had been conducted earlier.

Opening of the judgment. Loading the full judgment on LexPK…