MUHAMMAD KAMAL vs JAMSHID KHAN Ss — 2021 YLR 646 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.

MUHAMMAD KAMAL VS JAMSHID KHAN Ss. 302, 324, 114, 148 & 149---Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (XXII of 2000), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly--- Age of accused, determination of---Accused along with the acquitted accused were charged for committing murder of two persons of the complainant party---Accused had alleged that he was minor at the time of alleged offence---Scope---Trial Court had conducted an inquiry regarding the age of the accused and finally came to the conclusion that at the time of commission of the offence, he was major---Validity---Record showed that the accused was charged for the murder of two persons and attempting at the lives of complainant and his cousins by causing firearm injuries to them---Computerized National Identity Card issued to the accused showed his date of birth recorded as 01.01.1991---Representative of National Data and Registration Authority (NADRA) had also produced the "Family Tree" of father of the accused, according to which father of accused had four sons and two daughters---Details of dates of birth of his children were mentioned in the said "Family Tree", which also showed date of birth of the accused as 01.01.1991---Accused in support of his age had produced register dakhil kharij, however, the same did not inspire confidence and could not be given preference over his age recorded in the NADRA record---Accused had himself never claimed his juvenility before the police at the time of investigation nor during the trial---Said fact was not agitated even in appeal but was noticed by the Court while deciding his appeal that there was an apparent disparity in his date of birth which was recorded in his charge-sheet and statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. being one and the same---High Court, as an abundant caution remitted the case to the Trial Court for determining the age of the accused---Accused, on remand, had filed a civil suit for correction of his date of birth which appeared to have been filed on the basis of mala fide---Medical Report showed the accused more than 25 years of age---Date of birth mentioned in the CNIC inspired confidence which was rightly considered by Trial Court for determination of his age---Revision petition having no merits was accordingly dismissed.

MUHAMMAD KAMAL vs JAMSHID KHAN Ss — 2021 YLR 646 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR