Man accused of raping daughter freed by SC

The Supreme Court has acquitted a man, who spent 12 years in prison on charges of raping his own daughter, setting aside his life imprisonment sentence due to flawed and contradictory evidence.

A three-member bench headed by Justice Hashim Kakar, issued a 10-page judgment, authored by Justice Ali Baqar Najafi. The court overturned the previous verdicts of the trial court and the Lahore High Court's (LHC) that had upheld the sentence.

The order stated that the prosecution's evidence was discarded, as it lacked trustworthiness. "The sentence and conviction of the appellant is set aside. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case," the order read.

The case dates back to 2010 when the man's six-year-old daughter accused him of rape.

He was subsequently sentenced to life in prison and fined Rs35,000 by a trial court. The LHC upheld this verdict in 2013.

The Supreme Court's decision centred on critical inconsistencies in the prosecution's case. The judge also mentioned that the trial court did not put the Rationality Test to the victim before recording her statement.

Under the law, a child's testimony is only admissible if the judge is satisfied that the child understands the questions and the duty to speak the truth. "A child is a competent witness if he/she passes a standard of sufficient maturity of understanding about the facts which were to be narrated by her," the ruling stated.

The court found that the daughter's statement contained major contradictions and lacked clarity regarding the date and time of the alleged incident. Furthermore, the medical evidence was deemed inconsistent, as the doctor who initially declared rape later denied it during cross-examination.

The ruling also noted that key witnesses for the prosecution, the complainant's mother and maternal uncle, were not eyewitnesses to the alleged crime. Their testimony was classified as hearsay and therefore inadmissible.

A significant factor that came on record during the proceedings was an ongoing family dispute over inheritance and other domestic issues, suggesting a possible alternative motive behind the allegations.

Declaring the prosecution's evidence entirely unreliable, the Supreme Court bench ordered that the accused must be released immediately if he is not wanted in any other case.