HANIFULLAH alias PENTAR vs HABIB UR REHMAN Ss — 2021 YLR 899 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.

HANIFULLAH alias PENTAR VS HABIB UR REHMAN Ss. 302(b), 324, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Dishonest improvements made by complainant---Scope---Prosecution case was that the accused party made firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died including the son of complainant---Motive was altercation between the deceased and the accused party some days prior to the occurrence---Complainant had stated that when the accused appeared he had seen them from a distance of 10-paces holding pistols in their hands and that when they fired at the deceased he along with eye-witness ran away from the spot and the accused fired at them as well, where they luckily escaped unhurt---In his report, complainant kept mum regarding that particular aspect of the case---Complainant stated that the motive for commission of the offence was an early altercation between the deceased and the accused, when so, why the complainant and the eye-witness were fired at, when they had no nexus with the stated motive---Record showed that five brothers were charged for murder of the deceased but the prosecution remained unsuccessful to convince as to what magnitude of the motive was that put all the real brothers to do away with the deceased---Complainant failed to explain the motive and its intensity which led to the murder---Neither the complainant could produce independent witness in that respect nor the Investigating Officer could collect anything from the surroundings, which could substantiate the claim of the complainant---Complainant went on to say that only three out of the accused had altercated with the deceased, but he could not explain that when and where that altercation took place---Complainant introduced a shop keeper, who was Chachazad (cousin) of deceased, who stated that prior to the incident he was standing at the door step of his shop and at the time of firing he took shelter inside his shop, however, when said witness was further cross-examined he stated that he did not see the accused while firing at the deceased and that after the firing stopped he came out of his shop---Said witness went in glaring contradiction with what the complainant stated, as he stated that the accused when reached near the deceased they drew out their pistols and started firing, however, the complainant stated that from a distance of ten paces, he noticed the accused having pistols in their hands---Question arose as to when witness was inside his shop and he did not see the accused at the time of firing, how could he say and how could he see the accused pulling out their pistols before the firing was made---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

HANIFULLAH alias PENTAR vs HABIB UR REHMAN Ss — 2021 YLR 899 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR