QASIM ALI vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 147 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.

QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive not proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---Motive of the occurrence as stated in the FIR was that six days prior to the occurrence a quarrel took place between deceased and the accused but the same was patched up with the intervention of the respectables of the locality---No respectable of the locality, who patched up the matter between the parties appeared before the Trial Court in support of the motive part of the prosecution case---Moreover, the complainant while appearing before the Trial Court admitted during his cross-examination that neither he nor other witnesses witnessed the occurrence of motive---Moreover, in his statement recorded by the Trial Court, complainant did not mention any specific date, time or place of occurrence of the motive, whereas, eye-witness did not utter a single word about the motive of occurrence---No reason of the earlier quarrel between the accused and the deceased had been brought on the record---Thus, the prosecution had failed to prove the alleged motive---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of weapon of offence---Inconsequential---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---Record showed that a brick bat was recovered on the pointation of accused---However, recovery memo did not show that brick bat was stained with blood---Moreover, the said brick bat was never sent to the office of Forensic Science Agency to see as to whether the same was stained with blood or not, therefore, it was not safe to rely upon the said piece of evidence of the prosecution---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of nine hours in conducting postmortem examination upon the dead body of the deceased---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---According to the prosecution case, the occurrence in this case took place on 20.01.2022 at 03:20 p.m.---Complainant himself mentioned in the FIR that his brother (deceased) after receiving injuries died at the spot but according to post mortem report of the deceased, the dead body of deceased was brought in the hospital on 20.01.2022 at 11:50 p.m., and postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was conducted on 21.01.2022 at 12:10 a.m., i.e., after about nine hours from the occurrence---No plausible explanation had been given by the prosecution that as to why the dead body was brought to the hospital and post mortem examination was conducted with such a delay of about nine hours from the occurrence---Said delay in conducting the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was suggestive of the fact that the occurrence was unseen and the delay was consumed in procuring the attendance of fake eye-witnesses---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account and medical evidence---Conflict between---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---In the contents of the FIR, complainant alleged that the accused gave two brick bat blows which landed on the head and chest of deceased whereas in the post mortem report and pictorial diagrams there was only one injury on the head of the deceased---No injury on the chest of the deceased was noted by the concerned Medical Officer---Both the eye-witnesses stated before the Trial Court that the accused inflicted one brick bat blow on the head and three/four brick bat blows on the chest and shoulder of deceased---Said witnesses were duly confronted with their previous statements and improvements made by them in that respect were duly brought on the record---Moreover, the prosecution witnesses made improvements in their statements while appearing before the Trial Court regarding the number of injuries sustained by the deceased on his chest and shoulder and their improved statements was also in conflict with the medical evidence, therefore, their evidence was not worthy of reliance---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-availability of justification for the presence of witness at the time and place of occurrence---Chance witnesses---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---Ocular account of the prosecution was furnished by complainant and an eye-witness--- Both the witnesses were real brothers of the deceased---Said witnesses stated that they were not residents of the village where the occurrence took place rather they were residents of other city situated at a distance of 25/26 kilometers from the place of occurrence---Both the eye-witnesses did not give any specific reason for their visit to the village where the occurrence took place on the relevant day---Complainant conceded that he had neither any business nor residence near the place of occurrence---Eye-witnesses were not residents of the village where the occurrence took place hence they were chance witnesses, therefore, their presence at the spot at the relevant time without establishing any convincing reason was not free from doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE QASIM ALI VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of eye-witnesses---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant---Record showed that the conduct of the prosecution eye-witnesses of the case was highly unnatural---Complainant and eye-witness were both real brothers of deceased---As per prosecution case the complainant was accompanied by eye-witness, other witness (not produced) and the deceased and as such, the complainant party was comprising of 04-adults members, whereas, the accused was alone but surprisingly they did not try to apprehend the accused after the occurrence nor tried to intervene during the occurrence to save the deceased from the accused---Accused was not armed with any formidable weapon at the time of occurrence and he was only armed with a brick bat---Thus, conduct of the prosecution eye-witnesses, who according to their claim witnessed the occurrence, was highly unnatural, therefore their presence at the spot was highly doubtful and their evidence was not worthy of reliance---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

QASIM ALI vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 147 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ