BEHRAM vs State Ss — 2021 PCrLJN 35 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

BEHRAM VS State Ss. 324 & 34---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Scope---accused were alleged to have started firing upon the complainant-party with their respective firearms, as a result of which relative of complainant received injuries on his right arm and left foot---Dispute over grazing of livestock in village was stated to be a motive for the alleged occurrence---Injured was stated to be ahead of others, who was fired at by the accused, while the other two co-accused started firing at rest of the members of the complainant party, who took refuge behind the stones and escaped the firing---Firing of accused caused injuries to goats and lambs---Change of version was noticeable in initial version of the complainant and the one narrated in his examination-in-chief---Complainant had not stated in his initial statement that the injured was ahead of them and that accused had made firing upon him and that he got injured with the firing of accused---Nor had the other two accused been assigned the role of firing on rest of the complainant-party in the FIR---The general role of firing had been attributed in the FIR to all three accused upon all members of the complainant-party indiscriminately---Substantial improvements had thus, been made by the injured-complainant in his statement recorded in the case rendering his testimony untrustworthy---Complainant while deposing in court had stated that when they were going towards that village they had not taken any blankets with them, while the injured had stated in his cross-examination that the other fellows were having blankets with them---Injured had further stated in his cross-examination that when they were leaving for the area of that village, a person told them that the goats etc. belonged to one "S"---Other witnesses had not stated that anybody had informed them about the fact that the goats and lambs were belonged to "S"---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

BEHRAM vs State Ss — 2021 PCrLJN 35 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported