Abid Ali vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 383 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.

Abid Ali VS State Ss. 302(b), 201, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Motive not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of two sons of complainant by firing---As per the contents of the application for the registration of case and FIR, there was a dispute over water between the parties---However, while filing the private complaint on 30.06.2018, after 04-months and 20 days, the motive was improved, and the complainant mentioned that there was a dispute over the tube well between the complainant and the accused party---Complainant admitted during cross-examination that he had not pointed out the place where the motor was installed and whether the land was being irrigated by the tube well---Whereas the eye-witness deposed during cross-examination that as there was no previous enmity between the parties therefore he did not record any previous enmity between the parties in his statement before police---Appellants had admitted that their mother had filed a civil suit regarding the same tube well---Complainant stated that the connection of the tube-well was installed 20 years ago, and the connection was in the name of his uncle---Complainant had mentioned in the written statement that he and his uncle both had been jointly using the tube well in equal shares since about 1995---Later, in early 2018, said uncle of complainant received the expenses of his 50 percent share from complainant and assigned its ownership entirely to complainant---Complainant had not submitted any written agreement about the purchase of the remaining 50 percent share---Complainant only submitted an affidavit of his uncle, according to which his son died a long time ago, and that his sons did not have any concern with the tube well---Such affidavit was written on 10 May 2018, and based on the affidavit, the civil Court declared the suit infructuous, vide order dated 07.06.2018, while uncle of complainant did not appear and verify the contents of the affidavit---Deposition of complainant revealed that the land of father of appellants and his land were irrigated from the tube well before the occurrence---Complainant deposed that the accused were the paternal and maternal grandchildren of his uncle---Both the parties admitted that uncle's son and daughter's children were accused in the present case---In such circumstances, appearance of complainant's uncle before the Court was necessary to verify the affidavit's contents---Origin of the incident was shrouded in mystery as the complainant admitted that the tube well irrigated both lands before the occurrence---So irrigating land with tube well water was not a motive for the commission of the crime---Appeal was allowed and appellants were acquitted of the charge.

Abid Ali vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 383 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ