Muhammad Ali vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 2445 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Muhammad Ali VS State Ss. 302, 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence not corroborating oral testimony---Appellants (two in number) were convicted under S.302, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment each---Validity---Defence had not disputed the unnatural death of deceased, but pleaded their false implication---Soon after the crime, the deceased persons were taken to hospital, where they were medically examined by the doctor and after examination of dead bodies, the Medical Officer issued Medical-Lego-Certificates (MLCs), perusal of which (MLCs) reflected that the deceased received bullet injuries on their person, however, the fact remained that the medical evidence did not corroborate with the oral testimony---Medical evidence is not substitute of direct evidence rather is only a source of corroboration in respect of nature and seat of injury, the kind of weapon used, the duration between the injury and death and may confirm the ocular account to a limited extent but cannot establish the identity of the accused or connect him with the commission of offence---If the charge of murder is not proved through direct evidence, medical evidence solely is not helpful to the case of prosecution---Prosecution had failed to establish the charge against the appellants beyond the shadow of reasonable doubts---Appeals against conviction were allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2445 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case Muhammad Ali VS State Ss. 302, 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account not trustworthy---Appellants (two in number) were convicted under S.302, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment each---Validity---Eye-witnesses, produced before the Trial Court were not solid and worth credence---After ruling out the ocular account, the other circumstances of the case providing corroboration or support to the ocular account had automatically collapsed---Thus, the prosecution had failed to establish the charge against the appellants beyond the shadow of reasonable doubts---Appeals against conviction were allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2445 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case Muhammad Ali VS State Ss. 302, 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account not trustworthy---Appellants (two in number) were convicted under S.302, P.P.C., and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment each---Validity---Statements of all the prosecution's witnesses showed that the prosecution had absolutely failed to establish the charge through concrete and solid evidence---All the witnesses, including the complainant of the case, had narrated the occurrence in different mode and manner, which had created reasonable doubts in the case of prosecution---Prosecution is duty bound to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt and if any single and slightest doubt is created, benefit of the same must go to the accused and it would be sufficient to disbelieve the prosecution story and acquit the accused---Prosecution had failed to establish the charge against the appellants beyond the shadow of reasonable doubts---Appeals against conviction were allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Ali vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 2445 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR