SAEED AYAZ vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 112 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

SAEED AYAZ VS State Ss. 302, 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused made firing upon the complainant party, due to which, the son of complainant was hit and died---Complainant and a witness appeared before the Trial Court---Complainant while appearing in the Court had reaffirmed his allegation as recorded in the FIR whereas the witness who had appeared as witness, at the time of occurrence was a twelve years old boy---Statement of said witness showed that accused had some sexual desire for said witness and that was the probable motive for the occurrence---Said witness in his statement stated that he along with deceased brother would work in a brick kiln---On the relevant date when they finished their work and were preparing to leave the brick kiln for their house, accused asked him that he should stay behind, on that his deceased brother retaliated, which resulted into firing---Accused who was facing trial had fired at his brother, resultantly he died on the spot and in the meanwhile his father also reached at the spot---Witness, in his cross-examination stated that he could not say that from whose fire shot the deceased was hit and died---Witness also confirmed that at the time of occurrence it was dark however later he had voluntary stated that there was a light present near the place of occurrence---Close perusal of the evidence, site plan and medical evidence showed that the occurrence had taken place at the spur of the time most probably for the reason that the accused had a sexual desire for witness who was a twelve years old boy---Such was the doing of one person for which three persons had been charged---Two of the accused had already undergone their conviction---Keeping in view the safe administration of justice the present accused had earned benefit of doubt as right---Circumstances established that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside convictions and sentences recorded by the Trial Court. Head Notes

SAEED AYAZ vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 112 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported