Imagine a young girl enters a shop and never comes out. Five people are present inside the premises. Serious allegations emerge that the child was taken to an upper floor, sexually assaulted, and murdered. Understandably, the public demands answers and justice. However, an important question arises: can justice be achieved without a proper investigation and a fair trial?
In criminal cases involving allegations of rape and murder, modern investigations rely heavily on scientific evidence. This includes DNA analysis, forensic examination, potency tests, collection of biological samples, CCTV footage, digital evidence, and witness statements. These procedures are essential because they help establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In a typical sexual assault investigation, forensic experts collect swabs and other biological samples from the victim. DNA profiling is then conducted to determine whether any suspect can be scientifically linked to the crime. Similarly, a suspect may undergo medical examinations and forensic testing to verify whether the available evidence supports the allegations against him.
The concern arises when a suspect is arrested and then killed before such investigations are completed. If a crime occurs on one day, a First Information Report (FIR) is registered shortly thereafter, and the suspect is arrested within hours, can all forensic procedures, DNA analysis, laboratory reports, and evidence verification realistically be completed before conclusions are drawn?
The criminal justice system is designed to answer precisely these questions. Courts do not convict individuals merely on suspicion or public pressure. A conviction requires evidence that withstands legal scrutiny. Witness testimony, forensic reports, medical evidence, CCTV recordings, recoveries, and expert opinions must all be examined before a person can be declared guilty.
Pakistan’s legal history provides several examples where justice was ultimately delivered through the judicial process. In the tragic Zainab murder case, the offender was investigated, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced after the evidence was examined by the courts. Similarly, in the Motorway rape case and other high-profile criminal prosecutions, convictions were secured through investigations and legal proceedings rather than through instant punishment.
The same principle applies to every criminal case. Public anger and grief are understandable, particularly when the victim is a child. However, the rule of law requires that guilt be established through evidence rather than assumptions. If authorities arrest a suspect and immediately eliminate him without completing the investigation, many critical questions remain unanswered. Was the correct person arrested? Was the available evidence sufficient? Were all possible suspects investigated? These questions can only be answered through due process.
Many people criticize the courts for taking time to decide criminal cases. However, delays often occur because investigations are incomplete, forensic reports are delayed, witnesses fail to appear, or procedural requirements are not fulfilled. Police investigations must be completed, challans must be submitted, forensic laboratories must issue reports, doctors must testify, and witnesses must be examined before a court can reach a final conclusion.
A fair criminal trial is not merely a legal formality; it is the mechanism through which truth is established. Strong investigations supported by forensic science, DNA evidence, CCTV footage, and reliable witness testimony enable courts to deliver justice that can withstand scrutiny and appeal.
Justice is not achieved by killing a suspect before the evidence is tested. Justice is achieved when the truth is established through lawful procedures and when the guilty are punished based on credible and admissible evidence. The rule of law demands patience, thorough investigation, and respect for due process, even in the most emotional and disturbing cases.
Only then can society be confident that justice has truly been served.