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---Unnatural conduct of complainant---Chance witness---Effect---Prosecution case was that the accused party made firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died including the son of complainant---In the present case, the presence of the complainant was doubted when he admitted in his cross-examination that it was not his routine to enjoy the company of the deceased, rather his medical checkup brought them together on the day of occurrence---Complainant stated that soon after the incident the accused decamped from the spot, where after he came towards the deceased and with the help of co-villagers shifted them to cots---Investigating Officer did not notice as to whether hands of complainant were besmeared with blood or not---Complainant stated that the deceased were shifted in a vehicle to hospital and he after making the report came back to his village in the company of witness---Question was as to how a real father and real brother could leave the dead-bodies of the deceased unattended and unescorted and that why they did not take the pains to accompany the dead bodies to the hospital for post mortem examination---Conduct of the complainant was not only unnatural but abnormal as well, when he went back to his village in an unholy haste---Presence of the complainant was further doubted that neither he nor the eye-witness was the witnesses of identification before the police at the time of preparation of the injury sheets and inquest reports---None of the witnesses identified the dead-bodies before the doctor at the time of their post mortem examination, which showed that complainant was not present at the time of incident and the report was made when his attendance was procured---Said fact told nothing but that the report was made after preliminary investigation---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