NADEEM QAYYUM vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1290 ISLAMABAD

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

NADEEM QAYYUM VS State Ss. 302(b), 365, 201 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting with intent to secretly and wrongfully confine person, causing disappearance of evidence, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Last seen evidence---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the son of the complainant---Complainant, in his complaint, had expressly mentioned that he had been informed by his brother/witness that at about 06:15 p.m. he had seen the deceased coming out of his house and going along with accused and that he had been informed by his tenant and another person that at about 07:00 p.m. when they were coming towards Koral in a vehicle, they had seen the deceased with the accused persons on the service road near a brick kiln---Brother of complainant, in his examination-in-chief, deposed that on 20.01.2009 at about 06:15 p.m., he had seen the deceased going with accused in front of the outer gate of the complainant's house---Said witness had also deposed that while he was taking his ailing daughter in a taxi to the hospital, he again saw the deceased standing with accused outside a Masjid---Tenant of complainant had also deposed that he along with another person, while coming towards Koral on the service road, had seen the deceased with the three accused near a brick kiln---Had witnesses of last seen evidence not given evidence as to in whose company the deceased was last seen, the testimony of the complainant as to the deceased having been last seen with the three accused would have been purely hearsay and not worthy of any consideration---For an offence to be proved, it was not necessary that it must be seen to have been committed---Offence could be proved by circumstantial evidence also---Circumstantial evidence consisted of evidence of facts that were so closely associated with the fact in issue if considered together formed a chain of circumstances from which the existence of the principal fact could be legally inferred or presumed---Place where tenant of complainant had lastly seen the deceased with the three accused was in close proximity to the place from where the dead body of the deceased was recovered---Circumstances established that the case did not present special features warranting interference in the convictions of the accused persons---Judicial confession made by the accused persons could not be relied upon, thus the sentence of accused was reduced from imprisonment for life to the term already undergone/served by them---Appeal was partly allowed.

NADEEM QAYYUM vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1290 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR