MUHAMMAD USMAN vs State Ss — 2023 SCMR 1097 SUPREME-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD USMAN VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(iii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-hashimah---Reappraisal of evidence---FIR was lodged on the same day i.e. just after one hour of the occurrence---Thus, it can safely be said that FIR was lodged with promptitude---Promptness of FIR showed truthfulness of the prosecution case and it excluded possibility of deliberation and consultation---Ocular account in the case has been furnished by complainant and two other prosecution witnesses---Said prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record---Said witnesses had given all necessary details of occurrence qua the date, time, place, name of accused, name of witnesses, manner of occurrence, kind of weapon used in the occurrence, the locale of injuries and the motive of occurrence---Ocular account furnished by the prosecution was reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring---Medical evidence available on the record further corroborated the ocular account so far as the nature, time, locale and impact of the injuries on the person of injured was concerned---Complainant had received injury at the hands of the accused and his testimony as well as the stamp of injury on his person clearly proved his presence at the place of occurrence---Complainant and another prosecution witness were the inmates of the house where the occurrence took place, therefore, both said witnesses were the most natural witnesses---Defence did not seriously dispute the motive part of the prosecution story---In these circumstances, there was sufficient evidence available on the record to sustain conviction of the accused---Conviction of accused under sections 324 & 337-F(v), P.P.C. was maintained---Jail petition was converted into appeal and partly allowed.

MUHAMMAD USMAN vs State Ss — 2023 SCMR 1097 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR