ZEESHAN IFTIKHAR alias SHANI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1691 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

ZEESHAN IFTIKHAR alias SHANI VS State Ss. 302(b), 386, 440, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt, mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Presence of eye-witnesses at the relevant time of occurrence doubtful---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the son of complainant by firing due to non-payment of Bhatta and also made indiscriminate firing, causing damage to the mirrors, screens etc. of a vehicle, which created a sense of terror and panic in the area---As per complainant, the distance between his residence and the show-room/place of occurrence was 10 to 12 K.M., whereas the distance inter se the house of the complainant and house of eye-witness was about 15/16 K.M, within the radius of the Municipal Area of City---Admittedly, eye-witness was nephew/Bhanja of complainant and his residence was also situated at a distance of 7/8 K.M. from the place of occurrence---Both the witnesses as such were closely related to each-other and the deceased---Said witnesses apparently had deposed in unison while recording their examination-in-chief that on the day of occurrence at evening time, they had gone to purchase a vehicle from the showroom of Mr. "Y"---As per Sun Calculator of Pakistan available on the internet, on the day of occurrence the time of sun-rise in said city was 06:02 a.m. and sun-set at 6:23 p.m.---Admittedly, all the witnesses were residing within the municipal limits of the city---Instead of returning to their homes, when they could not find out a vehicle of their choice, the claim of prosecution witnesses that they all apparently aimlessly remained busy during that prolonged interregnum in conversation with each other up-till 01.45 a.m. (late night), which were not usually the business hours, palpably appeared to be an unnatural and preposterous attempt by the witnesses to establish their presence at the relevant time at the place of occurrence---As such the presence of both the eye-witnesses at the relevant time of occurrence seemed to be highly doubtful, therefore, conviction could not be sustained merely on the strength of their parrot like narrations---Prosecution had failed to prove other corroboratory limbs i.e. recovery and motive, and the charges under Ss. 386/ 440/34, P.P.C. against the accused before the Trial Court---Circumstances established that the prosecution had badly failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

ZEESHAN IFTIKHAR alias SHANI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1691 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR