MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias NIKKA vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1328 SUPREME-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 ASHRAF alias NIKKA VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Any doubt arising in the prosecution case is to be resolved in favour of the defence---Single circumstance creating reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of accused makes him entitled to its benefits, not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1328 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias NIKKA VS State Ss. 302(b), 302(c) & 337-F(vi)---Murderous assault---Reappraisal of evidence---Conviction, alteration of---Case of sudden fight without pre-meditation---Suppression of injuries sustained by accused party---Effect---Conviction under section 302(b), P.P.C altered to one under section 302(c), P.P.C.---As per the FIR/prosecution story, the accused along with a co-accused was alleged to give hatchet blow on the head of the deceased, which proved fatal---However, in the private complaint lodged by the complainant, the role of causing injury on the head of the deceased was enhanced while ascribing it to accused and two co-accused persons---Said two co-accused, who were ascribed a similar role to that of accused, had been acquitted of the charge by the Trial Court, which judgment had been upheld by the High Court---According to medical evidence, the deceased received only one injury on his head, which was an incised wound---Perusal of record also revealed that the occurrence took place all of a sudden; there was no pre-meditation on the part of the accused side and during the occurrence the accused and a co-accused also received injuries at the hands of the complainant party, which aspect had been suppressed---Although, no medical report in this regard could be placed on record but there was no denial to this fact that during investigation it was found that the accused and the co-accused had received injuries during the occurrence---Possibility could not be ruled out that it was because the accused was nominated in a murder case and was arrested soon after the incident, the police officials had not allowed the accused and co-accused to be medically examined being in league with the complainant---Such possibility created a doubt in veracity of prosecution version---Seemingly the prosecution exaggerated the contents of the private complaint and made an attempt to involve all the male members of the accused's family---In these circumstances, a dent in the prosecution case had been created, benefit of which must be given to the accused---Case of the accused was covered by section 302(c), P.P.C.---Accused had already served out major portion of his sentence which was more than 15 years---To meet the ends of justice, accused was convicted under section 302(c), P.P.C. instead of section 302(b), P.P.C. and was sentenced to imprisonment for the period which he had already undergone---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and partly allowed. Head NotesCase Description

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias NIKKA vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1328 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR