Citation Name: 2024 YLR 457 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NAWAB KHAN 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 457 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NAWAB KHAN VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence--- Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Accused was charged for committing murder of the complainant then injured by firing---Evidently, the injured was received by the Medical Officer at 11:30 a.m., whereas, the report was made by the deceased then injured at 11:15 a.m. to the local police, in the same hospital---Record was silent as to who brought the deceased then injured to the hospital and at what time---Time of examination of the injured by the Medical Officer and the time when the matter was reported to the local police were not in harmony with each other---Statement of the Medical Officer when taken into consideration with that of the scribe, both the witnesses contradicted each other on material aspects of the case---Scribe stated that on receiving information regarding arrival of the injured to the hospital, he reached there and at 11:15 a.m. where he recorded the report of the complainant, injury sheet was prepared and thereafter, the murasila was drafted and the deceased then injured was shifted to the doctor under the escort of Constable---Said witness further stated that it was in the emergency room of the hospital that he took the report and the Medical Officer was also present---Statements of the said two witnesses when taken into juxtaposition, led to an inference that neither the report was made in the manner nor the injured was examined at the stated time---If one considers the statement of scribe that he penned down the report at 11:15 a.m., prepared the injury sheet and shifted the injured to the Medical Officer, then it would contradict the statement of the Medical Officer on such particular aspect of the case and if the Medical Officer was believed, then in that eventuality, it was the scribe who lost his credibility---Medical Officer admitted that the injured was examined at 11:31 a.m. and he also admitted that it was 11:30 a.m., when the injured was brought to the hospital---If such was the state of affairs, then an inference could be drawn that the medical examination of the injured was conducted much earlier than the report was made---If one calculated the time which the injured spent before the Medical Officer, it told another story, as by 11:31 a.m., the Medical Officer started his medical examination and it took him 30 minutes to conclude, so in such eventuality, the injured remained before the Medical Officer till 12:01 p.m., whereas, the report was made at 11:15 a.m.---If such was the state of affairs, then there was no occasion for the scribe to have penned down the report as it was after the medical examination that the report was made and when the Medical Officer admitted that soon after examination the deceased then injured was referred to Civil Hospital, then it created a mystery that at what time the report was made and the injury sheet was prepared---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubts---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 457 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NAWAB KHAN vs State S — 2024 YLR 457 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR