JAN MUHAMMAD alias KHAFAI PAHORE vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 1572 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

JAN MUHAMMAD alias KHAFAI PAHORE VS State Ss. 302(b), 337-H(2), 114, 148 & 149---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 367---Qatl-i-amd, rash and negligent act, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Language of judgment---Contents of judgment---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of two sons of the complainant by firing---In the present case, Trial Court had held that prosecution had proved its case against the accused persons at the trial, but accused had been convicted under S. 302(b), P.P.C., and sentenced only for committing qatl-i-amd of one deceased and other accused had been convicted under S. 302(b), P.P.C., and sentenced for committing qatl-i-amd of other deceased---No finding as to the sharing of common object by the accused persons along with co-accused in the commission of offence had been recorded by the Trial Court---Though as per prosecution case accused along with co-accused (proclaimed offender) fired upon one deceased resulting in his death and other accused along with co-accused (proclaimed offender) fired at other deceased committing his qatl-i-amd---According to the prosecution evidence also, all the five accused in prosecution of the common object committed qatl-i-amd of both deceased persons, but Trial Court had failed to record separate findings regarding both deceased that each accused acted in prosecution of common object---Once it was established that each accused acted in prosecution of the common object or knew the ultimate object, then it would be immaterial whether each accused played a role or not---Thus, it was clear from the impugned judgment that it was passed by the Trial Court ignoring the principle of the common object regarding both murders---Moreso, it was the duty of the Trial Court to ascertain the aspect of the common intention or common object at the time of conclusion of the trial when charge was specifically framed under S. 302(b) rend with S. 149, P.P.C---Finding of the Trial Court showed that Ss. 148, 149, P.P.C. were also proved, but no finding with regard to the Ss. 148, 149, P.P.C., for double murders was recorded by the Trial Court---Thus, the mandatory provisions of S. 367, Cr.P.C. had not been followed by Trial Court---Case was remanded to the Trial Court for re-writing of the judgment, in circumstances.

JAN MUHAMMAD alias KHAFAI PAHORE vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 1572 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ