IMRAN ALI SHAH vs State Ss — 2021 PCrLJN 6 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.

IMRAN ALI SHAH VS State Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence---Scope---Prosecution case was that the accused made firing upon complainant and his brother, as a result of firing, they both were hit and got injured but the brother of complainant succumbed to injuries---In the present case, the prosecution was supposed to establish on record the injury on the person of the complainant by producing the concerned doctor who examined the injured and prepared his Medico Legal Report---Record transpired that the prosecution could not establish on record that which doctor examined the complainant in the hospital---Medico Legal Report had been produced by Medical Officer who stated that on the relevant day another doctor was on emergency duty but due to some inevitable circumstances, said doctor was not on duty and instead of him, he was assigned to perform emergency duty---Statement of that witness showed that if he was the person who examined the injured in the hospital and prepared the Medico Legal Report then why on the Medico Legal Report, he put his signature after writing "For"---Calendar of witnesses nowhere mentioned said Medical Officer and it was surprising that how the prosecution came to know that said witness was the doctor who examined the complainant at the time when he was brought to the hospital---Defence stated that the complainant was serving in the hospital and that Medical Officer/witness was his close relative--- Keeping in view the conduct of said Medical Officer, the court could not conclude that the injury on the person of the complainant had not been established and even the Medico Legal Report could not lead the Court to hold that in fact the complainant was injured and that he was examined by the doctor in the hospital---Record showed that while assessing the role of the accused and his specific charge for the injury caused on person of the complainant, it could safely be held that the charge against the accused had not been established beyond reasonable doubt---Even otherwise the Trial Court held both the accused responsible for the injuries specified to them by excluding the common intention---Overall assessment of the prosecution case brought the court to conclude that the prosecution had failed to bring home charge against accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed to the extent of accused and he was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court.

IMRAN ALI SHAH vs State Ss — 2021 PCrLJN 6 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported