EJAZ alias JAJJI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1835 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.

EJAZ alias JAJJI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 336, 449, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, itlaf-i-salahiyyat-i-udw, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused were charged that they made firing upon the complainant party after entering into their house, due to which one person died whereas three sustained injuries, however, due to the indiscriminate firing one of the accused was also hit and died whereas another was injured---Prosecution evidence showed that the prosecution witnesses had not only exaggerated the incident but had also suppressed the mode and manner of the incident---Admittedly FIR for the alleged occurrence had already been lodged on the same day i.e. 07-04-2012 by brother of deceased of the said FIR and one of the present accused was injured witness of said occurrence---Said injured was medically examined on the same day and Investigating Officer prepared his injury statement after registration of FIR on the same day under Ss. 302, 324, 148 & 149, P.P.C.---Police Constable took the injured to the DHQ Hospital for medical examination and that fact was also reflected from the Medico-Legal Certificate of injured accused and on the same day postmortem examination upon the body of deceased accused was conducted---Thereafter, the present FIR was lodged by complainant after four days of the occurrence---All the injured persons from both sides went to the concerned police station on the same day from where they were referred to the hospital for their treatment---Therefore, there was no dispute that first FIR was lodged promptly after alleged occurrence on the same day---Investigation was done against the crime reported through both FIRs---Entire prosecution evidence showed that the prosecution had suppressed the genesis and the original occurrence and had thus not presented the true version---In the said circumstances it was difficult to accept their testimony--- Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

EJAZ alias JAJJI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1835 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR