Asar Khan vs Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss — 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Dying declaration---Scope---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---Scribe of the murasila confirmed that before making the report the injured complainant was conscious and was oriented in time and space---Said witness further confirmed that he put some rational questions to the complainant who replied rationally, and so after getting satisfied regarding the capacity of the complainant, he drafted the murasila---Scribe at the time of report succeeded in getting a certificate from the Medical Officer and the Medical Officer also endorsed the murasila, where the factum of the understanding and capability to talk of the deceased (then injured) was confirmed---Medical Officer was examined, who confirmed that at the time of examination the injured was conscious and capable to talk and that the same had been mentioned in the Medico-Legal Certificate, prepared by him---Moreover, the incident occurred on 22.08.2016, the deceased (then injured) remained hospitalized till his death on 24.08.2016---Survival of the deceased (then injured) for long two days was another circumstance that confirmed that at the time of report the complainant was capable to talk---Medical Officers were cross-examined regarding the seat of injuries, the organs which got injured in the incident and thereafter the capability of the deceased (then injured) to talk, and they remained consistent regarding the consciousness and orientation of the complainant---Dying declaration got further support from the statement of the eye-witness, and when both were read in juxtaposition it confirmed that the prosecution succeeded in establishing its case against the appellants to the hilt---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Motive---Scope---absence or weakness of motive would hardly be a ground for dislodging the prosecution case provided it succeeds in bringing home guilt against the accused charged. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Possibility of substitution excluded---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured and later on died---In the present case, lack of previous blood feud between the parties was a circumstance which excluded the possibility of substitution---As the motive was an altercation over fallen trees, so there was hardly an occasion for the complainant to substitute innocent for the actual culprits---Court was not convinced that either the complainant or the eye-witness would make substitution, that too, when his real father and real brother were killed---In such the like circumstances, substitution was the rarest phenomenon---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of the witnesses at the place of occurrence proved---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---Scribe of murasula was examined, who stated that while on Gasht he received information regarding the incident---Soon after receiving information he reached THQ Hospital, where the deceased (then injured) reported the matter---After the report was made, he prepared the injury sheets and inquest reports---Injured complainant was referred to the Medical Officer for his medical examination and the dead bodies of the deceased for postmortem examination---After the report was made the same was explained to the complainant, who thumb impressed the same and the eye-witness verified the report---Said witness was put to the test of searching cross-examination in respect of the arrival of the dead bodies to the hospital, the place where he received information and the time he arrived to the hospital and the time the matter was reported by the complainant, but the defence failed to extract anything from his mouth, detrimental to the case of the prosecution---Medical Officer confirmed what the scribe disclosed---Medical Officer stated that the deceased (then injured) was produced to him by the police; that he examined the injured and prepared his Medico-Legal Certificate---Medical Officer disclosed that the injured was brought at 09:05 am and that time got its confirmation from the Medico-Legal Certificate---When the statements of the witnesses i.e. the scribe and the Medical Officer were read in juxtaposition, no ambiguity was left that the matter was reported at the stated time and that the injured was examined by the Medical Officer, soon after his arrival---Thus, it had been proved that the matter was promptly reported and that the eye-witnesses were present at the time of incident and in the hospital when the report was made---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Place of occurrence proved---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---Prosecution case got support from the fact that on one hand, the deceased received firearm injuries and also the complainant, whereas on the other, the Investigating Officer noted bullet marks on the trees---Recovery of blood stained earth from the spot and the collection of empties near from the places of the accused were circumstances which supported the prosecution case, more particularly, the place where the incident occurred---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Son of deceased not presented for evidence---No adverse inference under Art. 129(g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---Allegedly, one of the eye-witness despite of his availability was not produced and as such the defence tried its best to reap the harvest, by inviting attention to Art. 129(g) of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, for drawing a negative inference---However, a real son would in all circumstances support the case of the prosecution, that too, when his real father was killed in the incident---In such eventuality, Court was not in the mood to draw an adverse inference and Art. 129(g) would not apply in the circumstances of the present case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Statement of eye-witness complainant trustworthy---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---Eye-witness was examined, who stated that on the day of incident he along with deceased left his house and reached to the spot/fields to restrain the accused from cutting trees---On reaching to the spot, the deceased (then injured) asked the accused to stop cutting trees, as the matter was still to be resolved, which infuriated the accused who picked up their pistols and started firing at the complainant, the deceased and the eye-witnesses as well---Complainant after receiving firearm injuries fell to the ground and so did the deceased, whereas the eye-witnesses escaped unhurt---Deceased (then injured) was picked up from the spot, with the help of co-villagers, shifted to the hospital, and thereafter the dead bodies were brought to the hospital---Deceased (then injured) reported the matter and he also identified the dead bodies of the deceased before the police at the time of report and before the Medical Officer at the time of post mortem examination---Said witness was cross-examined on different aspects of the case but nothing detrimental could be extracted from his mouth---Said witness remained consistent regarding the manner in which the information was received and regarding the manner in which he along with others reached to the spot and entered into altercation with the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence supporting the ocular account---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured and later on died---Medical evidence was in harmony with the ocular account, as the seat of injuries on the bodies of the deceased found support from the site plan---Seat of injuries on the body of the deceased confirmed that they were fired from the places assigned to the appellants and that the same supported the case of the prosecution---Medical evidence and ocular account was in harmony and there was no conflict between the two---Medical evidence was confirmatory in nature and the same was only pressed into service when the ocular account failed, which was not the case in hand---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Preliminary investigation not conducted---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured but later on died---It was alleged by defence that preliminary investigation was conducted before lodging the FIR---In the inquest report of the deceased (then injured), FIR number and sections of law had not been mentioned---Said fact confirmed that non-mentioning of same in all the inquest reports was either the incompetency of the relevant Police Officer or that it went unnoticed---If the case had been preliminarily investigated then in the inquest report of the deceased (then injured) the FIR number and the sections of law must have been mentioned as the FIR had already been registered and this by itself was a sufficient proof that neither preliminary investigation was conducted nor the attendance of the eye-witness was procured at a belated stage---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Asar Khan VS Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Motive proved---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which two persons died and complainant was injured and later on died---Motive was alleged as a dispute over fallen trees and the witnesses succeeded in proving the motive---Even the Investigating Officer took into possession the fallen trees which were later on returned to its lawful owners by the Court of competent jurisdiction---Prosecution succeeded in proving the motive and the same was a factor which could be taken in support of the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in bringing home guilt against the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

Asar Khan vs Nazeer through PW/Nephew Ss — 2025 MLD 1254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD