Right of Private Defence in a Murder Involving Sexual Assault

Panel: Riaz Ahmad, J.

This criminal appeal, decided on March 26, 1984 , concerned Muhammad Rashid (Appellant) against the State (Respondent). The case involved charges under Sections 302 and 100, Exception 4, of the Penal Code. The core issue revolved around the right of private defence. The court considered the statement of the accused made under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code, emphasizing that such statements must be considered in their entirety and cannot be bifurcated. There was no direct or indirect evidence from the prosecution to prove its version, nor anything on record to contradict the accused’s statement. The deceased, who was ten years older than the appellant, allegedly took the appellant (aged 13/14 years at the time) to his

Dhari with the intent to commit sodomy. The absence of a cut mark on the deceased’s shirt and its presence on his

bunian suggested that the deceased had taken off his shirt and coerced the accused.

The court concluded that the appellant, being a 13/14-year-old in a state of agitation and provocation, and being forced at knifepoint by the deceased for unnatural lust, was justified in killing the deceased under Section 100, Exception 4 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The court found no evidence that the appellant was a catamite, leading to the inference that he resisted the deceased’s intentions. It was held that the appellant did not exceed his right of private defence as he did not cause more harm than necessary. The appellant was deemed justified in apprehending death or grievous injury if he refused to submit to the intended sodomy. Consequently, the appeal was accepted, and the appellant was acquitted of the charge. The State’s counsel was not explicitly named as “Advocate-General” in this specific case information, but the general representation for the State would be a public prosecutor or similar.

Download PDF