SHAMSHER AHMAD vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1931 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.

SHAMSHER AHMAD VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Prosecution witnesses related to the deceased---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 1931 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SHAMSHER AHMAD VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Ocular and medical evidence---Preference---Where ocular evidence is found trustworthy and confidence inspiring, the same is given preference over medical evidence. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1931 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SHAMSHER AHMAD VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be produced on record---Ocular account furnished by the prosecution was reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring---Medical evidence available on the record corroborated the ocular account so far as the nature, time, locale and impact of the injury on the person of the deceased was concerned---Counsel for the accused could not point out any reason as to why the complainant would falsely involve the accused in the present case and let off the real culprit, who had committed murder of his real son---Substitution in such like cases was a rare phenomenon---So far as the delay of about 2 hours 45 minutes in lodging the FIR was concerned, the complainant in his cross-examination had reasonably explained such delay---Parties were known to each other and no question of mistaken identity arose---Even otherwise, the prosecution witnesses of ocular account had clearly mentioned that a tube-light was glowing at the main gate in front of which the occurrence took place---Source of light was also established from the rough site plan as well as scaled site plan, which was essential part of the prosecution case---After the occurrence, the accused also remained absconder for about six months, which was also a corroboratory piece of evidence against him---Sufficient evidence was available to sustain the conviction of the accused---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1931 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SHAMSHER AHMAD VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence--- Sentence, reduction in---Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment---Motive not established---Recovery of weapon inconsequential---High Court had rightly disbelieved the motive by holding that there was no positive proof that the deceased was, instrumental in rejection of matrimonial proposal sent by the accused---So far as the recovery of weapon of offence was concerned, admittedly no empty was recovered from the place of occurrence, which could be sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis, therefore, the recovery was inconsequential---High Court had rightly taken a lenient view and converted the sentence of death into imprisonment for life---No further leniency could be shown to the accused---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1931 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SHAMSHER AHMAD VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Minor discrepancies in prosecution case---While appreciating the evidence, the court must not attach undue importance to minor discrepancies---Such minor discrepancies which do not shake the salient features of the prosecution case should be ignored--- Accused cannot claim premium of such minor discrepancies---If importance is given to such insignificant inconsistencies then there would hardly be any conviction. Head NotesCase Description

SHAMSHER AHMAD vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1931 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR