IJAZ AHMED vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1577 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.

IJAZ AHMED VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Prosecution witness related to the deceased---Testimony---Mere relationship of the prosecution witnesses with the deceased cannot be a ground to discard the testimony of such witnesses unless previous enmity or ill will is established on the record to falsely implicate the accused in the case. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1577 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Complainant/ prosecution witness was subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record---Said witness remained consistent on each and every material point, therefore, it could safely be concluded that his evidence was reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring---Medical evidence was in line with the prosecution story---Accused could not point out any reason as to why the complainant had falsely involved him in the present case and let off the real culprit, who had committed murder of his real brother especially when the accused was apprehended at the spot after a chase of co-villagers---High Court while taking into consideration the fact that the accused only fired single shot coupled with the fact that motive had not been proved and the recovery was inconsequential had rightly taken a lenient view and converted the sentence of death awarded to the accused into imprisonment for life---No further leniency could be shown to the accused---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and partly allowed and conviction and sentence of accused under section 302(b), P.P.C. along with compensation amounting to Rs.100,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased or in default whereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for four months was maintained. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1577 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS State S. 392---Robbery---Reappraisal of evidence---Complainant in his cross-examination candidly stated that he had not seen the accused snatching motorcycle and other articles from the witnesses---Prosecution case was that during chase, the accused concealed the cash under certain trees of a garden, which was subsequently recovered at his instance---However, this seemed to be impossible because when the people were chasing him, it was not possible for the accused to dig a hole and conceal the amount therein---Nothing was available on record to suggest whether the mobile phone, allegedly snatched by the accused, was recovered from him---No identification of said looted articles was established from the record to meet the legal requirements, hence, it could not be considered sufficient to connect the accused with the commission of the crime to the extent of robbery---When the accused was apprehended, he was not on or with a motorcycle, therefore, it can safely be said that recovery of motorcycle could not be used against him---Prosecution could not produce reliable evidence to sustain conviction of the accused for robbery under section 392, P.P.C.---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and partly allowed and conviction and sentence of accused for robbery was set-aside. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1577 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Conviction---Testimony of single witness---Quality of evidence is to be considered and not the quantity of evidence---Evidence of one person, if found confidence inspiring, is sufficient to sustain conviction. Head NotesCase Description

IJAZ AHMED vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1577 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR