NOOR ZAMAN vs State S — 2021 YLR 1711 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.

NOOR ZAMAN VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that the accused made firing upon the complainant and her husband, due to which husband of complainant died while complainant was injured---Motive for the offence was stated to be a dispute over use of pathway---Record showed that the complainant was examined by the Medical Officer at 8:00 a.m.---Complainant reported the matter at 8:20 a.m. and at the same time the injury sheet and inquest report were prepared and injured was sent to the Medical Officer for treatment---If the Medical Officer examined the lady at 8:00 a.m. the time when the report was not yet made, then how he endorsed the injury sheet which was prepared at 08:20 a.m. and the report was made at 08:10 a.m.---Medical Officer did not mention as to whether the complainant was fully conscious, capable to talk and oriented in time and space, so much so, her blood pressure and pulse rate were not recorded---Medical Officer stated that at the time of her examination the complainant was in critical condition---Said witness further stated that besides other major organs of the body, her lungs were injured and according to medical jurisprudence, when the lungs got injured, it turned hard to breath---Medical Officer went on to say that neither he issued a certificate regarding her capability to talk nor he gave his opinion, so much so he did not endorse the murasila---Scribe stated that the complainant reported the matter, whereafter, he prepared injury sheet---If the report was made in the hospital and the Medical Officer was available what prevented the scribe to request the doctor for a fitness certificate to ascertain as to whether the injured was capable to talk or not---Scribe did not take the pain to call for the doctor so that the report of the complainant could be taken in his presence and even after the report was made no endorsement of the Medical Officer was requested on the murasila---Conduct of scribe was not above board and also that of the Medical Officer who examined the injured---Cumulative effect of the said facts was that the injured was brought to the hospital by the co-villagers and the initial investigation was conducted prior to the report and it was on arrival of some interested persons that the matter was shown reported by the complainant and the accused was charged---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

NOOR ZAMAN vs State S — 2021 YLR 1711 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR