HAQ NAWAZ vs State S — 2022 YLR 721 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

HAQ NAWAZ VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Presence of the eye-witnesses at the spot was justifiable---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Motive behind the occurrence was that deceased forbade the accused from his house and due to that grudge accused committed the murder of the deceased---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by brother and paternal cousin of the deceased being eye-witnesses---Admittedly, the accused was married to the sister of the deceased since the last 8/9 years prior to the occurrence---Both the eye-witnesses explained their presence at the place of occurrence categorically---Said witnesses in a very natural and forthright manner narrated the incidence and gave each and every detail of the same---Occurrence took place inside the agricultural land belonging to brother of deceased and at about 02.30 p.m., the presence of deceased and eye-witnesses at that time, inside their own agricultural land, just in front of their houses, could not be doubted and was, but natural---Both the witnesses explained their arrival at the place of occurrence and also the reason for their presence there---Similarly, eye-witness also explained that his house was adjacent to the house of complainant and he along with the witnesses and the deceased were working at the place of occurrence before the arrival of the accused---Site plans of the place of occurrence revealed that the presence of the witnesses had been clearly marked in the same and it had been mentioned in the same that the occurrence took place in the land belonging to deceased---Perusal of the said site plan of the place of occurrence further revealed that the land cultivated by eye-witness had also been marked in the same, whereas the house of the complainant and the deceased had also been clearly identified---Such evidence proved that not only both the witnesses were present at the place of occurrence at the time of occurrence but they had also witnessed the occurrence which had taken place inside their own cultivated land---No friction between the accused and the witnesses existed prior to the occurrence, which could have made the eye-witnesses interested to get the accused, their own brother-in-law, involved in the occurrence falsely---Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but the defence had failed to make cracks in their deposition with regard to the accused and the veracity of their statements had been proved---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond the shadow of any doubt---Due to some mitigating circumstances, death sentence of the accused was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal against conviction was dismissed with said modification in sentence.

HAQ NAWAZ vs State S — 2022 YLR 721 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR