Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL vs MUHAMMAD SAEED S

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 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Medical evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---No doubt, the injuries observed by the concerned Police Official on the dead body of the deceased were found to be the same by the Medical Officer in the post mortem report---Said fact alone was not sufficient to prop up the prospection case as medical evidence was supportive evidence but by itself could not identify assailant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Complainant not present at the spot---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---At the foot of the site plan, the Investigating Officer made an endorsement to the effect that the accused himself pointed out the manner in which he committed the crime---Accused was taken to the place of the occurrence where he, as per the contention of the Investigating Officer, indicated point No. 2, as his place of presence the complainant pointed at the time of preparation of the site plan---Investigating Officer prepared a memo of this fact in the presence of two marginal witnesses, however one of those witnesses was produced as its witness by the prosecution---Said recovery witness stated in the cross-examination that no recovery was made during the pointation---Cross-examination of said witness further showed that the complainant was not present at that time---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence--- Benefit of doubt---Improvements made by complainant in his statement---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Complainant admitted that in the murasila he did not disclose the name of father of the accused---Complainant and other persons were at a distance of 70/80 paces from the graveyard---In the murasila, complainant showed that distance in respect of hearing the fire shots---Crime spot and the place where he heard firing were at distance of 40/42 paces---In the murasila, complainant disclosed that he heard the firing and saw the accused running after firing---Said fact contradicted supplementary statement of complainant in which he said that he saw with his own eyes the accused firing at his son---Complainant admitted that in the murasila he did not specifically show himself as an eye-witness---Complainant denied a suggestion that he was not present on the spot---In the supplementary statement, complainant showed himself as an eye-witness; in the murasila as having heard the firing only---Despite all that, complainant admitted the murasila and the supplementary statement as correct---Complainant also admitted that other people accompanied him and that some village people were attracted to the spot and helped him in lifting up the dead body of his deceased son---But no person was examined as an independent witness of the occurrence---However, it needed no emphasis that the information the complainant disclosed in his supplementary statement was well within his knowledge at the time he was making report in the murasila---Thus, it was established that the complainant made dishonest improvements---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence--- Benefit of doubt---Contents of murasila not verified---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Record showed that the contents of the murasila were not verified by anyone despite the fact that other persons accompanied the complainant---Complainant was not confronted on that point---However, the police official who recorded the report at the strength of the murasila was asked about it and he admitted that the report was not verified by any other person---Report clearly showed that the complainant was accompanied by other persons---Corroboration by another witness would have lent credibility to the account of murasila---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence--- Benefit of doubt---Sole statement of complainant---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Prosecution case rested on the sole statement of the complainant, father of the deceased---Admittedly, the complainant did not see the accused firing at the deceased---Complainant's assertion was that near the place of the occurrence, he heard fire shots and saw the accused running after firing---Complainant was not alone when he heard the fire shot---While on the way home, the complainant was accompanied by other people---Prosecution didn't bring any single person from amongst those present with the complainant to support its stance---In order to plug such fundamental dent in his case, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement before the Investigating Officer, after two hours of the occurrence---In that statement, the complainant offered an absolutely new version of the story of the occurrence and thereby put at naught his entire case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of weapon of offence and crime empty---Reliance---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Record showed that a shell of 30 bore pistol from the place of the deceased on the spot on the date of the occurrence (i.e. 24.03.2020) was recovered, and a .30 bore pistol from the possession of the accused at the time of his arrest on 10.04.2020 was recovered---Pistol was unlicensed, so a separate criminal case was registered against the accused---Shell and the pistol were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory on 12.04.2020, which tendered a positive report---Investigating Officer, who arrested the accused on 10.04.2020, deposed that he made no recovery from accused---Said witness stated that nothing incriminating was recovered by him from the possession of the accused---Said fact made the recovery of the pistol substantially doubtful---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 39 & 40---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery on the disclosure of the accused---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---No doubt, the provision of Art. 40, Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, provided that so much of information as was brought to light in consequence of discovery might be proved---However, the information obtained in such manner as the situation was in the case in hand, did not attract the application of Art. 40---Reason was that this did not amount to discovery as the Investigating Officer had already seen the scene of the occurrence and prepared its site plan---Mere taking of the accused to the same place and verifying from him his place of presence and other details were not sufficient---Legally, such evidence was inadmissible and should, in no case, be allowed to be brought on the record, let alone believing in it---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Withholding material evidence---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Complainant admitted that ordinarily young males of the village dug a grave when someone passed away---Thus, it could not be presumed that complainant would have been present in the graveyard or, for that matter, was returning from the graveyard, having regard to common course of natural events and human conduct---If that aspect was ignored for a while, another aspect worth consideration was that the complainant was not alone while he was either in the graveyard or was returning home from the graveyard---But no person was examined in support of the prosecution case---Said fact led to an adverse inference that had such evidence been produced, it would have not favoured the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL VS MUHAMMAD SAEED S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt--- No motive alleged--- Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant by firing---Prosecution set up no motive---In his supplementary statement, too, the complainant remained silent about motive---On the judicial record, a copy of a police Daily Diary was available---Daily Diary was recorded by the Police Officials who raided the house of the accused on the day of the occurrence at 07:30 p.m.---While the accused was not found at his residence, two women informed the police that at 02:00 p.m. the same day, one Mr. "H" of the same village took the minor son of the accused to the nearby jungle and committed sodomy with him, which the victim reported in his house---Said witnesses further reported that a jirga was also sent to the house of complainant but to no avail---Daily Diary was not exhibited---Such fact did not intend to read it a motive as neither the prosecution had stated it, nor was motive itself a material aspect of the case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JANAT GUL vs MUHAMMAD SAEED S — 2023 PCrLJ 1213 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ