In a significant ruling regarding the motorway sexual assault case, the Lahore High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the prime convicted-Abid Ali and Shafqat (alias Bagga)-against their death sentences. The court held that the DNA, medical, and other forensic evidence against the accused was sufficient to establish their guilt.
A two-member bench of the Lahore High Court, comprising Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi and Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, issued a written verdict stating that the prosecution had proven the case based on solid evidence and that the sentences awarded to the accused were in accordance with the law. In the written judgment, the court observed that the statement of the victim holds fundamental importance in cases of sexual assault, and noted that in the present case, the victim’s statement was corroborated by other evidence.
The victim recounted the details of the incident, and the accused were correctly identified. The identification parade for both accused was conducted in accordance with established procedures; in its verdict, the court ruled that the DNA report establishes the guilt of the accused, Abid Ali. Blood samples recovered from the vehicle matched the accused’s DNA, thereby providing a strong foundation for the prosecution’s case.
The medical report, DNA, forensic evidence, and other proofs are consistent with one another, leaving no doubt regarding the guilt of the accused. In its verdict, the court stated that during the incident, the accused forcibly removed the woman and her children from the car and subjected her to gang rape near the motorway; this was a crime of an extremely grave nature that struck fear into the entire society.
The verdict stated that no leniency could be granted to the convicts in such heinous crimes. The Lahore High Court ruled that the death sentences handed down to Abid Ali and Shafqat (alias Bagga) by the trial court were commensurate with the gravity of the offense and the available evidence. The court dismissed the State’s appeal seeking an enhancement of the sentences under certain provisions; it held that upholding the sentences-given the nature of the crime, the strength of the evidence, and the impact of the incident-was in accordance with the demands of justice. Consequently, the convicts’ appeals against their death sentences are dismissed, and the sentences are upheld by the Honourable Court.