M. Ihsan alias Malkoo vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 334 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

M. Ihsan alias Malkoo VS State Ss. 302(b), 337-F(i) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Common intention not established---Vicarious liability---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing firearm injuries to his other brother---Record showed that that the appellant "MA" to whom admittedly neither any overt act nor any firearm injury either to the deceased or injured was attributed, was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court for sharing 'common intention' with the principal accused---Ordinarily, every accused was individually responsible for a criminal act done by him---No one could be held responsible for an independent act or wrong committed by another---In the crime report, the complainant did not utter even a single word qua prior concert or pre-arranged plan between the appellants to kill the deceased---Even both the acclaimed eye-witnesses while appearing in the dock in the Court room did not make even slight indication that there was a plan or meeting of mind of both the appellants to commit the murder of deceased which was sine qua non for attracting the provisions of S.34, P.P.C---Both the witnesses simply stated that at the time of crime, appellant while armed with firearm was accompanying the principal accused---Mere presence of the appellant with the principal accused in the absence of any pre-arranged plan between them was not sufficient to hold him guilty of vicarious liability---Entire prosecution evidence was silent qua the relationship of the appellant with the principal accused---Neither the motive part of occurrence had any relevance with the appellant nor there was any iota of material from which it could be inferred that the appellant had any animosity with the complainant party---In the absence of any evidence that intention of principal accused to kill the deceased was in the knowledge of the appellant, he could not be held guilty of vicarious liability---Thus, the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the appellant for sharing common intention with the principal accused, as such his conviction and sentence on that basis could not be allowed to hold the field---Appeal against the said accused "MA" was allowed, in circumstances.

M. Ihsan alias Malkoo vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 334 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ