KHALID MEHMOOD vs State Ss — 2022 MLD 1848 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

KHALID MEHMOOD VS State Ss.302, 324, 337-F(iii) & 449---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Injured witness---Scope---Accused was charged for intruding into the house of complainant while armed with a pistol and committed murder of 13 years aged nephew of complainant, during the incident complainant and his bhabi (sister-in-law) also received injuries from the pistol shots fired by accused---Injured witness was the mother of slain boy and was having abode within the four-walls of the house wherein the incident occurred---Gleaned from the deposition of injured witness that she was house-hold lady thus in accordance with daily pursuit of life she should have been present at a place none other than her house---Acclaimed presence of injured witness could not legally be suspected, more importantly when the defence had not brought anything to the contrary on record---Even otherwise, the presence of a witness, who was an inmate of the house wherein crime scene of a murder case was situated, was to be accepted in the absence of some convincing material to the contrary brought on record by the defence---More importantly, when the injured witness was not having some axe to grind with the assailant---Medical Officer found injured witness to be in receipt of firearm injuries on right arm and back of her chest---No material or circumstance was brought on record by the defence from which it might be insinuated that traumas on the body of injured witness were self-suffered or fabricated---In the absence of some exceptional circumstances put forth by the defence, the injuries on the person of a witness were generally considered stamp of his/her presence at the spot of murder incident---Injured witness unwaveringly encountered the cross-examination of defence and provided confidence inspiring detail of the incident---Said injured witness implicated none but the accused for the injuries on her person as well as the trauma which led to the death of her son---Said witness had an option to spread a wider net so as to implicate in the case at least one more person by attributing him either her own injury or of her son but she opted not to do so---Said aspect reflected positively upon the intrinsic worth of her testimony persuading to accept as correct what she deposed in the court---Injured witness had no rancorous against the accused for his false implication in the case and that too through the tool of substitution---Since the deposition of injured witness was befitting with the medical evidence hence, it was lent to place explicit reliance upon it for adjudicating the guilt of accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case but due to non-proving of motive part of the occurrence, the sentence was reduced to imprisonment for life---Appeal against conviction was dismissed with modification in sentence.

KHALID MEHMOOD vs State Ss — 2022 MLD 1848 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 MLD