AMIR MUHAMMAD KHAN vs State S — 2023 SCMR 566 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.

AMIR MUHAMMAD KHAN VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Crime report was lodged after more than five hours of the occurrence---Distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was 21 kilometers---Nowhere in the entire evidence, the prosecution had explained the reason for the delay in reporting the matter to the police with such a delay---Delayed FIR showed dishonesty on the part of the complainant and that it was lodged with deliberation and consultation---Sole eye-witness of the occurrence stated that the accused allegedly decapitated the head of the deceased from the rest of his body, and that both the head and the body were separately picked up by the police---However, such stance of the witness was negated by the medical evidence and statement of investigating officer---Record showed that the accused was the grandson of the deceased and he was being brought up by the deceased---Appellant alleged that due to the apprehension that the deceased would transfer his whole property in the name of accused, his father i.e. the complainant committed murder of his deceased-father---When the accused had taken a specific stance and in support of the same had placed on record the relevant documents, the High Court ought to have taken into consideration the statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C.---Except for his oral assertion the complainant did not produce any independent evidence to substantiate the motive part of the prosecution story, therefore the prosecution had failed to prove motive---So far as recovery of blood stained hatchet was concerned, the same was allegedly recovered on the pointation of accused from a thoroughfare, which was easily accessible to everyone, therefore, the same was inconsequential---Facts and circumstances of the present case were sufficient to cast a shadow of doubt on the prosecution case, which entitled the accused to the right of benefit of the doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted of the charge. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

AMIR MUHAMMAD KHAN vs State S — 2023 SCMR 566 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR