Kamal Jalal vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 298 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.

Kamal Jalal VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 338-C & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, Isqat-i-janin, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of the complainant at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the wife of complainant and her unborn child by firing---Complainant admitted that during the days of occurrence he was serving as a Hawaldar in FC Intelligence Branch and was performing his duties and his duty timing was from 08.00 AM to 06/7.00 PM---If complainant was serving as a Hawaldar in FC and his duty timing was from 08.00 AM to 06/07.00 PM then his presence at 02.40 PM (time of occurrence) in the house could not be accepted by a prudent mind---Though complainant had stated that he was on leave from duty on the eventful day and in that regard also produced a leave certificate but the said certificate on the one hand was a photocopy, while on the other hand, had not been produced/exhibited by any official---Such certificate had also not been produced by complainant before the Investigating Officer during investigation of the case---Investigating Officer had also not recorded statement of any official of the FC in that regard---In such view of the matter, the leave certificate on the part of the complainant was an abortive attempt to justify his presence at the spot---Secondly, if complainant was the first target of the accused then his escape or let off by four accused armed with automatic weapons ejecting numbers of shots in seconds was another strong circumstance which made his presence at the spot at the time of occurrence highly doubtful---Thirdly, keeping in view the customs and traditions of people of the part of the country where occurrence look place, the women folk strictly observed pardha and in presence of male members in the house, they are not allowed to go out of the house in case of any commotion or brawl outside the house rather male members in such like situation go out of the house to see what is happening---Thus, coming out of the deceased on the commotion of children was another strong circumstance which convinced a prudent mind that complainant was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 338-C & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, isqat-i-janin, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Medical evidence had supporting prosecuting case---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the wife of complainant and her unborn child by firing---Record showed that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution's case---Deceased had sustained a solitary firearm entrance wound, direction of which was from upward to downward---None of the accused had been shown at a higher position than the deceased at the time of firing, therefore, the entrance wound on the person of the deceased was a serious blow to the prosecution's case---Though, positive serologist report with regard to the blood secured from the spot and the last worn bloodstained clothes of the deceased proved the place of occurrence to be the same as alleged by the prosecution and postmortem report proved the unnatural death of the deceased due to firearm injury but being corroborative and confirmatory pieces of evidence, thus in absence of direct evidence, they by no stretch of imagination told the name(s) of the culprits---Such pieces of evidence are always taken in aid of the direct evidence and not in isolation---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 338-C & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, Isqat-i-janin, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Mode and manner of the alleged occurrence doubtful---Accused were charged for committing murder of the wife of complainant and her unborn child by firing---Coming of four accused to the house of the complainant with whom they had no ill will or enmity rather had cordial relation and then opening firing for no reason or motive was a disturbing circumstance pinching a prudent mind---No bullets marks had been noticed on the gate and walls of the house of the complainant---No spent bullet had been shown as recovered from the spot---As per autopsy report the deceased had sustained a solitary firearm entry wound with corresponding exit, direction of which was from upward to downward, meaning thereby that the assailant was at a position above the deceased at the time of firing which was not the case of the prosecution---Only 05 empties of 7.62 and one empty of .30 bore had been shown recovered from the spot despite the fact that four accused had been assigned the role of indiscriminate firing---In case of firing by four accused with automatic weapons, much damage should have been caused to the deceased and the complainant and there should have been bullet marks on the main gate as well as walls of the house of the complainant this was not the case herein---Such facts and circumstances clearly suggested that the occurrence had not taken place in the mode and manner as alleged by the prosecution---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 338-C & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, isqat-i-janin, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of eye-witness at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the wife of complainant and her unborn child by firing---Complainant in his statement had not assigned the role of firing on his nephew/eye-witness to the accused---Contrary to it the eye-witness had charged the accused for firing at him---In cross-examination eye-witness admitted that he was resident of Bara District Khyber and during the days of occurrence was residing in Peshawar---Eye-witness had not stated a single word qua the purpose of his visit to the house of his uncle---In cross-examination eye-witness had stated that he was present in front of house of the complainant at the time of firing---Said witness had also not sustained a single scratch what to say of receipt of firearms injuries---Escape of eye-witness from the firing of four accused having sophisticated weapons or his left off by them to stand as an eye-witness against them was also a strong circumstance which made his presence at the spot highly doubtful---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---When case of the prosecution is found to be doubtful, then every doubt, even the slightest, is to be resolved in favour of the accused. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 338-C & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, isqat-i-janin, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of weapon of offence and crime empty---Accused were charged for committing murder of the wife of complainant and her unborn child by firing---As regards positive Forensic Science Laboratory Report one 30-bore crime empty recovered from the spot had been fired from the pistol shown recovered on the pointation of one of the appellants from his house---Said appellant had been shown arrested on the day of occurrence i.e. 22.10.2021, while the alleged pistol was recovered on his pointation on 24.10.2021---No explanation, much less plausible, had been furnished by the prosecution as to why the empty was kept in the Police Station till recovery of the pistol on 24.10.2021---Again, no explanation had been furnished by the prosecution as to which pistol and empties were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory on 26.10.2021---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Prosecution is duty bound to prove its case through cogent and confidence inspiring evidence beyond shadow of reasonable doubt and it cannot derive any benefit from the weakness of defence. Your Search returned total 35531 records from 5100 - 5150 Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Kamal Jalal VS State admission by counsel of accused---Effect---accused in a criminal case is not bound by the admission made by his counsel.

Kamal Jalal vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ