Abdullah vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 220 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.

Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence in line with ocular account---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Medical evidence supported the case of the prosecution---Medical Officer explained that the deceased received three firearm entry wounds and he also disclosed the time between injury and death i.e. instantaneous and time between death and postmortem about 40 minutes---Medical evidence was in line with the ocular account---Harmony between the medical evidence and ocular account had further substantiated the claim of the complainant and the same had strengthened the case of the prosecution---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of complainant and eye-witness at the spot proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Complainant disclosed that on the day of incident while coming from the mosque, the appellant fired at the deceased and resultantly he died on the spot---Dead body was hurriedly shifted to the hospital, where complainant reported the matter---Eye-witness supported the report of the complainant and he also explained the circumstances in which the incident occurred and the dead body was shifted to the hospital---Admittedly, the incident occurred in the village of the complainant, that too, when the deceased performed his Zuhar prayer---As the incident occurred at 01.30 pm so the stance of the complainant got support regarding his prayer in the mosque---Site plan depicted that the mosque was situated adjacent to the place of incident and that by the time of occurrence the deceased had already come out from the mosque followed by the complainant and the eye-witness---As the complainant was a farmer by profession, so his presence in the village at the stated time was not only convincing, but also appealed to a prudent mind---Keeping in view the age of the complainant, it could be expected from a person of such age to perform prayer in congregation, and keeping in view the time of incident, no other view could be taken, but the one that after doing his work in the field, the complainant returned home to take meal and to perform his prayer---Availability of the complainant at the stated time was convincing and it appealed to the judicial mind of the court---Defence also questioned the presence of the eye-witness at the time of incident, but when the eye-witness was examined, he explained his presence on the spot and in the mosque on the day of incident---True that during the days of incident, the eye-witness was a student, but equally true that nothing was brought on record that at the stated time he was present in the school and even the Investigating Officer could not collect any document in that respect---While reporting the matter the complainant had mentioned the name of the eye-witness and when the eye-witness was present at the stated time, no other inference could be drawn but the one that he was present with the complainant in the mosque and after performing his prayer he was also available in the street---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Related and interested witnesses, evidence of---Reliance---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Record showed that the witnesses were closely related to the deceased, however, the defence could not bring on record any evidence confirming their mala fide or their interest to implicate the appellant falsely---Even otherwise, it did not appeal to the judicial mind of the Court that a real father would substitute an innocent person for the murderer of his son and under no circumstances would let off the actual culprits---Mere relationship of the witnesses would hardly be a circumstance for holding them unreliable and for excluding their testimony from consideration---Once the defence failed to allege mala fide to the witnesses and once it came on record that the witnesses had no interest to falsely implicate, then under all circumstances the statements of the witnesses must be taken into consideration---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Matter reported to the police with promptitude---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Record showed that matter was reported to police with no loss of time---Complainant in reply to a question responded that they visited the police station but he did not report the matter---Complainant/witness further explained that he stopped in the police station for few minutes and thereafter went to the hospital---As on one hand, the complainant was of extreme old age, whereas on the other being illiterate he did not understand the nitty gritty of the matter and he could not understand the intention of the defence, when such a question was asked---Matter was promptly reported, the dead body was examined by the doctor soon after the report was made and that the post mortem examination was conducted within the shortest possible time---Prompt report by itself had excluded the possibility of consultation and deliberation---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Substitution, a rare phenomenon---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Appellant was singularly charged and the inter-se relationship between the appellant and the deceased could not be ignored---Record showed that the daughter of the deceased was married to the appellant---Relationship between the spouses became strained and ultimately it led to their divorce---Relationship between the parties was established on record and even the marriage between the appellant and daughter of deceased had been admitted by all related---Deceased was working abroad and it was few months prior to the incident that he returned to his home---Marriage between the parties stood dissolved some 7/8 months before the incident and the deceased lost his life because of the same---In case of divorce it was the deceased who was expected to retaliate and not the appellant, but it could not be ignored that it was the divorce which urged the appellant to retaliate and that it was the deceased who was suspected for bringing the spouses to the point of no return---Witnesses remained consistent and in view of the fact that the accused was singularly charged, and the consistency between the witnesses and the strained relationship between the parties, were the circumstances which must be taken into consideration---Even otherwise, in case of single accused substitution was the rarest phenomenon---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Motive proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive as alleged was that the daughter of the deceased was married to the appellant and that the relationship between the spouses became strained and ultimately it led to the divorce some 7/8 months prior to the incident---Relationship between the parties was established on record and even the marriage between the appellant and daughter of deceased had also been admitted by all related---Question was put to the appellant while recording his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C, regarding the divorce of the deceased; he admitted that he had divorced the daughter of deceased---In case of divorce it was the deceased who was expected to retaliate and not the appellant, but it could not be ignored that it was the divorce which urged the appellant to retaliate and that it was the deceased who was suspected for bringing the spouses to the point of no return---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Unexplained abscondence of the accused---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Record showed that the appellant remained absconder for considerably long time as the occurrence took place on 28.10.2017 and the accused was arrested on 20.08.2020, and he failed to explain the same---As such the same could be taken into consideration in support of the other evidence on file---Abscondance by itself is not sufficient to hold an accused guilty, but when the prosecution succeeds to bring home guilt against the accused charged, that too, through trustworthy and confidence inspiring witnesses, then unexplained abscondance can be taken into consideration---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Abdullah VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of crime empties from the spot---Reliance---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Investigating Officer collected 06 empties of .30 bore from the place of accused; the same were sent to the Firearms Expert to ascertain that from how many weapons the same were fired---Report was received stating that the same were fired from one and the same .30 bore pistol---Laboratory report is supportive in nature and it alone cannot be pressed into service for convicting an accused, but once the ocular account inspires confidence, then such piece of evidence can be taken into consideration and it by itself will lend support to the prosecution case and to the statements of the witnesses---Prosecution fully succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellant---Appeal, being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, in circumstances.

Abdullah vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 220 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ