MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA vs State S — 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd--- Reappraisal of evidence--- Delay in carrying out postmortem of deceased---Effect---Post-mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted seventeen hours after the alleged occurrence---Prosecution and counsel for the complainant were unable to point out any justifiable reason to explain the marked delay in carrying out the post-mortem of deceased---Such unexplained delay in the post-mortem put a prudent mind on guard to very cautiously assess and scrutinize the prosecution's evidence---In such circumstances, the most natural inference would be that the delay so caused was for preliminary investigation and prior consultation to nominate the accused and plant eye-witnesses of the crime---Appeals were allowed, and both the appellants were acquitted of the charge. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---To extend the benefit of the doubt it is not necessary that there should be so many circumstances---If one circumstance is sufficient to discharge and bring suspicion in the mind of the Court that the prosecution has faded up the evidence to procure conviction then the Court can come forward for the rescue of the accused persons. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Contradictions in evidence of eye-witnesses---Motive not proved---Independent eye-witness withheld---Probability of false implication---There were material inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements of both the alleged eye-witnesses of the occurrence---Alleged motive for the murder of deceased was illicit relations between his wife (appellant "N") and appellant "M"---One of the alleged eye-witnesses did not support the allegation of an illicit relationship between the appellants, nor did he utter a single word regarding this during his examination as a witness---More importantly, during his lifetime, the deceased did not file any complaint with the police against the appellant "M" or take any action against his wife (appellant "N"), for having an illicit relationship with appellant "M"---Nor did appellant "N" file any suit for dissolution of marriage against the deceased, which would be a natural outcome in such a situation---Thus, the allegation of an illicit relationship between the appellants, as levelled by the prosecution, was without merit---Prosecution had an independent eye-witness, however, it did not produce him---Prosecution withheld the best evidence, which undermined the credibility of its account---Furthermore, the alleged occurrence took place in daylight in a populated area; however, no one from the locality came forward to support the story of the prosecution---Star witness of the prosecution acknowledged that the complainant had not given the deceased his share of the inheritance from the property left by their father---Additionally, it was revealed that the deceased's wife i.e. appellant "N" used to pressure her deceased husband to demand his rightful share of the inheritance from the complainant---In this view of the matter, the possibility of false implication of appellants could not be ruled out---Fact that the deceased was being urged by his wife to assert his inheritance rights suggests a potential motive for the complainant to falsely implicate the appellants---Appellant "N" and the deceased had four children, and the elder daughter was 10 to 12 years of age at the time of the occurrence---She was alleged by the appellant "N" to be present at the time of the occurrence---She would have been able to give rational answers to questions posed to her; however, she was not interrogated by the investigating officer in respect of the occurrence---Appeals were allowed, and both the appellants were acquitted of the charge. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State Motive---False implication---Motive is a double-edged weapon, which can be used either way and by either side i.e. for real or false involvement in a case. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence--- Recovery of electric wire and pistol---Inconsequential---So far as the recoveries were concerned, the prosecution had shown recoveries of electric wire and pistol, the alleged weapon of offence, but it did not support the case of the prosecution for the reason that these recoveries were corroborative pieces of evidence and were relevant only when the primary evidence, i.e., the ocular account, inspired confidence---However, the ocular account in this case was full of contradictions and did not inspire confidence---Appeals were allowed, and both the appellants were acquitted of the charge. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Medical evidence not pointing towards death by strangulation---Medical officer during cross-examination, stated that there were no scratches or any marks of injury on any part of the body of the deceased, which were commonly found in a case of death by strangulation---Considering the conclusion in the post-mortem report and the evidence of the medical officer, and analyzing them in light of the principles laid down in Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, the prosecution's claim that the death of the deceased was caused by throttling was doubtful---Appeals were allowed, and both the appellants were acquitted of the charge. Citation Name: 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA VS State Medical jurisprudence---Death by hanging---Death by strangulation---Distinction---Distinguishing characteristics and marks on the dead body of deceased caused due to death by hanging and death by strangulation listed.

MUHAMMAD IJAZ alias BILLA vs State S — 2024 SCMR 1507 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR