PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

DAD MUHAMMAD vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1595 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2023 YLR 1595 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
YLR
Parties
DAD MUHAMMAD vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal

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

Judgment text as reported

DAD MUHAMMAD VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 147 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused were charged for committing murder of the complainant's brother and nephews and a labourer due to previous enmity---Alleged occurrence took place on 26.11.1995 at 9:30 a.m., and the FIR was lodged on the same date at 11:00 a.m. after one and a half hours of the occurrence and the accused and co-accused were nominated on the basis of suspicion---Complainant was not produced before the court as a prosecution witness---Trial Court issued the summons as well as warrants of the complainant, but despite that, the complainant was not traceable---Complainant was the brother of the deceased and uncle of the another deceased---Complainant was not an eye-witness of the occurrence---According to his report on the day of occurrence, complainant was present in his house when he was informed about the incident which had taken place at his shop---Complainant in his report was not sure about the assailants who had committed the said offence---Perusal of the FIR showed that at the time of registration of the FIR, the complainant was not even aware about the assailants, that's why he mentioned in his report that whether the crime had been committed by the nominated accused either on their own or with the help of others was yet to be known---In the case in hand, the evidence of the complainant was not his own because the complainant did not mention in the FIR who informed him about the occurrence, and it was still shrouded in mystery that who had told the names of the culprits to the complainant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English