GHUNGAR KHAN vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 32 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.

GHUNGAR KHAN VS State Ss. 302(b), 147, 148 & 149---anti-Terrorism act (XXVIII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Chance witnesses---Non-availability of justification for presence of witnesses at the place of occurrence---Un-natural conduct of eye-witnesses---Scope---Prosecution case was that accused and co-accused committed murder of brothers and nephew of complainant by pelting stones after having forcibly caught them---Prosecution had produced three eye-witnesses including complainant in support of its charge---Said three witnesses who were closely related to the deceased had stated that the accused pelted stones at the deceased and also made firing upon them---Neither the said witnesses received any injuries nor produced any medical certificate in respect of any injuries received by them---Said witnesses also did not react or showed any response when the accused persons were causing injuries---No one could believe that the close relatives would remain silent spectators in a situation like that case, their intervention was very natural to rescue the deceased but they did nothing to save the deceased from the clutches of the accused persons---Presence of witnesses on the crime spot due to their unnatural conduct had become highly doubtful therefore, no explicit reliance could be placed on their testimony---Said witnesses had only given photogenic/ photographic narration of the occurrence---Presence of two witnesses at the place of occurrence was further doubtful because their names were not mentioned in the FIR as such---Record reflected that the occurrence took place on 13.05.2013 at 11:30 a.m. allegedly in presence of the said three witnesses but the report was lodged on 16.06.2013 and the dead body of the deceased were recovered on 15.06.2013---Witnesses stated that the accused persons after killing the deceased escaped from the place of occurrence and witnesses left the dead body at the place of occurrence---Circumstances suggested that it was unusual on the part of such close relatives to leave the dead bodies of the deceased on the spot and after a month and three days the dead bodies were brought by Investigating Officer to the hospital---Conduct of said witnesses was unnatural, thus, it could be held that all the three witnesses were planted at a subsequent stage after consultation by the complainant party---Testimonies of the said interested witnesses did not appeal to the logic to be true nor on the basis of such shaky statements conviction could be awarded or maintained---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Head NotesCase Description

GHUNGAR KHAN vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 32 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported