BILAL HASSAN vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 729 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.

BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of weapon of offence from the possession of accused---Inconsequential---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Record showed that a rifle 244-bore was recovered from the possession of the accused with positive report of Forensic Science Agency---As per the prosecution case, on 03.03.2016, the accused was arrested from his Dera and upon his disclosure, rifle 244-bore and three live bullets were recovered---Investigating Officer secured the same through a recovery memo---Head Constable stated that on 22.02.2016, the Investigating Officer secured ten crime empties of 244-bore through recovery memo, which were handed over to the Moharrar---Forensic Science Agency Report revealed that a parcel of 44-bore rifle was submitted on 04.03.2016, and a parcel of ten 44-caliber cartridges was submitted on 01.03.2016 by Police Officer---Given the admission of prosecution witnesses that on the day of occurrence, i.e., 22.02.2016, the accused was in police custody and Investigating Officer collected five crime empties it created doubt about the recovery of rifle 244-bore on 03.03.2016 and its positive report---Such circumstances, the recovery of the weapon of offence and a positive report were not of any consequence---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit 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 complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Record showed that there was conflict between the ocular account and medical evidence---Report of Medical Officer revealed that from the upper level, a fire shot was made by the accused, which hit the deceased---As per the prosecution witnesses, i.e., the accused made a straight fire, which hit on the front of the chest of the deceased and he received an injury in standing position---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-recovery of Shalwar/trouser of injured---Consequential---Statement of injured not recorded---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Admittedly, the incident occurred inside the deceased's house at odd night hours---Eye-witnesses failed to explain why Shalwar/trouser of injured was not secured by the Investigating Officer during the investigation or handed over by the Medical Officer---Non-handing over the Shalwar of injured had much significance in the instant case---As per the prosecution case, injured opened the door of the house after accused knocked the same---It did not appeal to the prudent mind that a woman without Shalwar/trousers would come forward to do any work in our social setup---Prosecution's case mainly revolved around the injured, who opened the door---Investigating Officer moved an application for permission to record the statement of injured which was allowed by the Medical Officer, but even then, the statement of injured was not recorded---During the trial, injured expired---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of three hours and thirty minutes in lodging the FIR---Consequential---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Record showed that the occurrence occurred at 03.30 a.m. (night), and the distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was 5/6 kilometers---Complainant took three hours and thirty minutes to report the incident to the police at the police station---In the prosecution evidence, there was a severe flaw to precisely fix the time when the incident was reported to the police---Said aspect of the matter was sufficient to cast doubt about the authenticity of the FIR---Inordinate delay of three hours and thirty minutes from the time of the commission of the offence remained unexplained and rendered the whole of the prosecution version doubtful---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive not proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Motive behind the occurrence was that the complainant's sister gave her personal Haveli to deceased, which raised a grudge in the mind of the accused, due to which he committed the said occurrence---Although, the prosecution had alleged motive for committing the incident by the accused, however, the prosecution in that regard produced no evidence---Prosecution had been unable to establish a motive in the case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of eleven hours and forty five minutes in conducting the postmortem examination upon the dead body of the deceased not explained---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Record showed that the Medical Officer received the application for postmortem at 03:00 p.m.---Per the postmortem report, the dead body was received in the mortuary at 05:00 a.m. on 22.02.2016, whereas the doctor received complete documents at 03:05 p.m. on 22.02.2016---Thus, there was a delay in the postmortem examination of about 11 hours and 45 minutes, which was supported by a doctor's statement---No plausible explanation was on record as to why the postmortem of the dead body was delayed for 11 hours and 45 minutes---Said aspect of the matter was sufficient to cast doubt about the authenticity of the FIR, which created serious doubt about the genuineness of the prosecution story---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Benefit of every doubt is to be extended in favour of the accused. Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE BILAL HASSAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Conflict between the statements of witnesses---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to his wife by firing---Record showed that the eye-witness deposed that the accused made the first fire shot on the person of his father, which hit on the front of his chest and he fell; after that, his wife, to save the deceased, came forward and accused made another fire shot, which hit his wife and she became injured---There was conflict between the statements of both witnesses regarding the fact that who was hit by the first fire made by the accused---In that background, the mode and manner of the incident as deposed by the witnesses seemed doubtful---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

BILAL HASSAN vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 729 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ