Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1113 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHAN MUHAMMAD vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1113 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHAN MUHAMMAD VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Presence eye-witnesses at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the deceased by firing---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by two eye-witnesses including complainant---Eye-witnesses though stated to be present at the scene of occurrence at the relevant time and to have witnessed the tragedy, but the prosecution side had absolutely failed to justify their own conduct at the spot---Complainant stated in his statement before the court that he took the injured to the police station and lodged the FIR---Other eye-witness also stated in his statement that complainant took the injured to the police station---On the other hand, Police Constable, who was a recovery witness of the blood-stained earth and bullet empties recovered from the place of occurrence, stated during cross-examination that when they reached the place of occurrence, the injured was present there---Said witness further stated during cross-examination that the injured were shifted to the hospital in a private vehicle---During the cross-examination, said witness stated that they reached the place of occurrence at 3:15 p.m.---On the other hand, Investigating Officer stated that when he reached the hospital, he found victim and a female in injured condition---Lady Medical Officer, who examined the deceased (then injured) stated that on 27.11.2021, the injured was brought to the hospital by constable---Injured was well oriented of time and place, meaning thereby that the complainant left the injured at the place of occurrence and went to the police station for lodgment of the FIR---Thus, it remained mystery that why complainant did not take the injured to the hospital---According to the statement of said witnesses, the occurrence took place at 2:30 pm, and the injured arrived at the hospital at 3:30 p.m.---Distance between the place of occurrence and DHQ Hospital was 12 kilometers---When the deceased was brought to the hospital, he was alive and well-oriented---Injured was referred to Combined Military Hospital, and on the way, he succumbed to injuries---Deceased had received injuries on his belly, however, still, he was not taken to the hospital---It was hard to believe and was against human conduct that a person who had received a firearm wound kept bleeding on the spot for such a long period and was brought to the hospital subsequently---According to Medical Officer, the deceased (then injured) was brought to the hospital by a Police Constable---Such fact also proved that neither of the eye-witnesses were present at the place of occurrence---Had eye-witnesses been present they would have necessarily taken the deceased to the hospital---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish the culpability of the accused through reliable, trustworthy, and confidence-inspiring evidence---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1113 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHAN MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2024 YLR 1113 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR