Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN vs State Ss

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

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Dying declaration---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Record showed that the occurrence in the case took place on 13.07.2016 and injured brother of complainant died on 29.08.2016 i.e. more than one and half month after sustaining the injuries---Investigating Officer in his statement had clarified that after getting permission from doctor he had recorded the statement of said injured on 22.08.2016---No specified forum was necessary before whom such dying declaration could be made---In that view of the matter, no illegality was committed by the Investigating Officer while recording the statement of injured then died, whose statement otherwise, had been found to be in line with the narration of the FIR---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Motive proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Dispute over a piece of land purchased by the complainant was alleged to be bone of contention and formed motive behind the occurrence---Apart from the consistent statements of witnesses giving background of dispute over a piece of land, it was admitted position that both the parties i.e. the complainant and the accused already carried differences and litigation between them remained pending---Even registration of number of criminal cases against each other, stood projected from the record available on the file---Thus, motive appeared to have been established in the case---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Injured as a natural witness---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Injured/father of the complainant was the resident of land adjoining to the place of occurrence, therefore, was a natural witness---Further injured was shifted to the hospital on the same day at 10.15 a.m. where he was medically examined by Medical Officer, as such, his presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time remained far from any doubt---Apart from the fact of having sustained injuries during the occurrence, injured while appearing in the dock made statement which was consistent on all crucial aspects of the case i.e. the date and the time of occurrence, the mode and the manner in which occurrence ignited and also the role played by the accused during the occurrence---Said witness was subjected to cross-examination at considerable length but nothing damaging to the prosecution or favourable to the defence could be elicited from his mouth---Similar was the position with witness of ocular account who also toed injured witness and his statement also remained un-shattered during cross-examination---In any way, if the statements of witnesses of ocular account were thrown out of consideration, even then sole unimpeachable statement of injured had been found sufficient to believe the prosecution case---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Evidence found doubtful to the extent of acquitted co-accused relied for convicting the accused due to the latter's distinct role---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Defence alleged that the same set of witnesses had already been disbelieved by the trial court to the extent of five co-accused, who too had been nominated in the FIR and specific allegation had been levelled against four of them and by that fact the prosecution case was seriously damaged and accused/appellant was also entitled for such relief---True that five out of six accused stood acquitted but it was equally admitted fact that they were acquitted by the court inter alia on the ground that none of them was carrying firearm and none from them had caused injury to the deceased or to injured---One of the accused was assigned specific role of causing injuries to sister of complainant and similarly other accused were also attributed general role of causing injuries to her, but Medical Officer who had conducted medical examination of said injured lady in clear words stated that possibility of fabrication qua such injuries could not be ruled out and such opinion of the doctor remained unchallenged by the prosecution---As regards injuries allegedly sustained by aunt of complainant, whatever might be the reason, admittedly the said injured was not produced in the witness box---Said were the reasons which weighed with the trial to record acquittal of the remaining accused persons---Thus, stricto sensu it could not be said that prosecution witnesses were disbelieved to the extent of acquitted accused persons---Even otherwise, it was trite law that on the principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, if the witnesses were disbelieved against one set of accused, their testimony could not be accepted qua other accused, yet under the principle of abundant caution, an accused could be singled out from the others---Case of the present accused was entirely different from the acquitted co-accused, as it was only accused who was carrying firearm weapon with him, he was nominated in the FIR with specific attribution of causing injuries to brother as well as father of complainant, brother of complainant succumbed to such injuries, whereas, father of complainant survived, appeared in the dock as witness and made statement in line with the narration of the FIR---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of crime empties and weapon of offence corroborating ocular account---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---In the present case, three crime empties was collected from the spot on 14.07.2016 and the same were received in the office of Forensic Science Agency 19.09.2016---Subsequently, the accused was arrested on 17.10.2016 and on 21.10.2016 during interrogation he led to recovery of repeater along with live cartridge from the room of his house---Said weapon was submitted in the office of Forensic Science Agency on 24.10.2016---Forensic Science Agency Report had been found in the positive, in the sense that weapon was found in mechanical operating condition with safety features functions properly and the empties were identified as having been fired from the said weapon---Thus, recovery evidence lent full support to the ocular account---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Delay of more than twenty four hours in lodging the FIR not consequential---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Record showed that occurrence in the case took place on 13.07.2016 at 8.30 a.m. but the FIR was recorded on the next day i.e. 14.07.2016 at 9.15 a.m.---Mere delay in lodging the FIR was never considered sufficient to disbelieve the prosecution case---Delay in lodging of the FIR only put the Court on notice to undertake close scrutiny of evidence available on record to avoid false involvement of the accused---If evidence recorded in Court appeared to be trustworthy and convincing, then delay in lodging of the FIR could be ignored---Four persons of one family were injured; two were medically examined on the same day at 10.15 a.m. by Medical Officer at DHQ, Hospital, upon dockets by the police, which fact was established by MLCs of both the injured persons---One of the injured was in precarious condition; therefore, from DHQ Hospital, he was referred to other hospital---Complainant himself was away from his house due to his occupation in a case pending before the Board of Revenue---Thus, his traveling back to his place of residence and then to hospital as a first priority to see the injured as stable had been found to be quite usual and normal human conduct---In that view of the matter when the injured were medically examined well within reasonable promptitude, considering that complainant party must be in extreme panic and anxiety, the main consideration would have been to save the lives of injured persons---Delay in lodgment of the FIR in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case was not fatal to the prosecution, especially when nothing had come on the record from the defence that by such delay what benefit the prosecution would have derived---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment---Mitigating factors---Co-accused acquitted---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Co-accused who too had been nominated in the FIR stood acquitted and the reasoning behind such acquittal had been found to be convincing---Said factor created mitigation---Thus, while maintaining the conviction under S. 302(b), P.P.C., the sentence of death of accused was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(i), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing injuries to father, sister and aunt of the complainant---Record showed that Medical Officer when medically examined brother of complainant on 13.07.2016 found eight firearm entry wounds each measuring 2 cm x 2 cm x DNP on the left side of abdomen near the umbilicus, with blackening and inverted margins---Similarly, when father of complainant was medically examined by the same doctor on the same day, firearm entry wound .8 cm x 8 cm x DNP on outer side of left knee, left leg and 4 cm x 1 cm on outer side of left upper arm were found on his person---Locale of injuries, dimension, kind of weapon used and also their duration were fully in line with the prosecution case---Circumstances established that the prosecution succeeded in proving its case against the accused, however due to mitigating factors, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM YASIN vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 1200 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ