GUL MIR vs State S — 2021 YLR 2041 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

GUL MIR VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Accused was charged for committing murder of cousin of the complainant by shotgun fire---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by five witnesses---Occurrence, in the present case was reported by the complainant, who did not mention the motive of occurrence, it was quite natural because complainant was not resident of vicinity and was on visit to the father of the accused---Record showed that an altercation between children of both sides gave rise to the altercation between their elders---Said recent event might not be in the knowledge of the complainant, on the other hand, two witnesses/brothers of the deceased were also living in the same boundary-wall and were party to the altercation between the two families; thus, said brothers of deceased being natural witnesses stated a true account and deposed in respect of very reason behind the murder of their brother---Statements of witnesses recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. and their court statements clearly mentioned the motive behind the occurrence---Motive emerged through testimonies of independent witness could not be termed as dishonest and improved version of the prosecution's case, but in fact brought a clearer picture before the court---Crime weapon (shotgun) and an empty casing of a bullet fired from said shotgun were not recovered---Brother of deceased provided the names of witnesses, who were gathered on the spot after the occurrence and their testimonies being independently corroborated by the other eye-witnesses of the occurrence were not only reliable but being confidence inspiring were sufficient to record conviction against the accused---Ocular account of the witnesses was corroborating each other on material points and the defence had failed to shatter their credence through any independent adverse evidence, being contrary to the case as set out by the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully proved the charge of murder of the deceased against the accused beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt; however, it could not be gathered from record that murder of the deceased was premeditated or was based on some previous motive between the parties---Awarding death sentence to the accused would be against the dictates of justice---Possibility of sudden provocation developed at the spur of the moment could not be ruled out---Possibility could not be ruled out that due to altercation between the parties, the deceased would have entered into the havaili of accused, and the accused under the fear of injury or due to sudden provocation fired upon him---Considering said aspects of the matter as mitigating circumstances, capital punishment could not be awarded to accused, therefore, sentence of death awarded to accused was altered to that of imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification.

GUL MIR vs State S — 2021 YLR 2041 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR