AMAN ULLAH SHAH vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1865 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.

AMAN ULLAH SHAH VS State Ss. 302, 324, 337-U, 337-a(i), 337-a(ii), 337-F(i), 337-F(v), 337-L(2), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, itlaf of teeth, shajjah-i- khafifah, shajjah-i-mudihah, damiyah, ghayr-jaifah-hashimah, causing hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Presence of the eye-witnesses at the venue doubtful--- accused were charged that they along with their co-accused assaulted the complainant party, due to which one person died whereas seven sustained injuries---Record showed that deceased after sustaining firearm injury fell down and then was lifted/shifted by the complainant and others to a rickshaw of a person who was resident of the same village but he was not interrogated during the investigation---Complainant admitted during the cross-examination that while shifting the deceased to rickshaw and hospital, his clothes got blood stains but neither his blood stained clothes were produced nor were they taken into possession by the Investigating Officer---Witnesses were at variance regarding salient features of the case---Complainant stated that only 5/6 fires were made by the accused party, whereas a witness deposed that the accused fired about hundred shots---Complainant went on to state that at the time of occurrence, he along with the deceased and other was standing in front of the shop but no specific point was suggested by the scaled site plan---Statement of draftsman revealed that the place of occurrence was surrounded by a Chowk, however, he was unable to specify the direction of the arrival of the accused and from where they left the crime scene---Said witness admitted that had the said injured witnesses told him, he could have shown the same in his site plan and whatever the witnesses told him, he incorporated those facts without addition or omission in his notes recorded on the scaled site plan, but said fact was not confirmed by injured witness who had shown his ignorance about arrival of Draftsman at the place of occurrence---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond any shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

AMAN ULLAH SHAH vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1865 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR