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---Site plan prepared on pointation of complainant and witnesses---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of two sons of complainant by firing---In the scaled site plan, the presence of eye-witnesses was shown at point "E," which was on the northern side of the land of the complainant---Position of the witnesses had been changed in the scaled site plan from the southern side to the northern side---On the perusal of the inquest report, in column No. 24, a map of the place of occurrence had been drawn, which reflected the same position shown in the un-scaled site plan---Complainant and the eye-witness changed their stance and presence of the witnesses on the land, which was ploughed before the occurrence by the witnesses to strengthen their case---Case of the prosecution was that due to a dispute of water on irrigation, the incident took place, however, only the tube well was shown in the passage and the agricultural land belonging to the accused side had not been shown in the un-scaled and scaled site plans---There was admission on the part of draftsman, that on the pointing of the complainant and witnesses and at the direction of the Investigating Officer, he prepared scaled site plans---From the prosecution evidence, it was revealed that the scaled site plan and un-scaled site plan were prepared on the pointing of the prosecution witnessesand that fact also got reaffirmed by the complainant while cross-examining draftsman---In both site plans, a significant change was made about the land the witnesses ploughed---Substantial change made in the site plan was with purpose---If the presence of the witnesses was considered on the land of the complainant on the southern side, then it was not possible for the witnesses to witness the occurrence with a specific role, which took place on the path, which led from south to north, as in the un-scaled site plan, point "K" was shown at the south eastern side, away from the place of occurrence, where land was ploughed---Un-scaled site plan also did not demonstrate the complainant's presence---If witnesses were present at considerable distance from the place where deceased received injuries by the hands of assailants and grown up crop was intervening the places then witnesses' deposition with specification of roles of assailants qua inflicting firearm injuries was not believable---Though in his complaint complainant annexed site plan with changed detail of place of occurrence, yet did not negate correctness of site plan annexed with state case as well as Naqsha Khasra detailed in Column No.24 of the inquest report during trial of the case, hence, changed site plan was of no help to the case of complainant---As per the scaled site plan and the statement of draftsman, there was a wheat crop adjacent to the main passage on the northeastern side---If witnesses were present on the eastern side, then, in the presence of wheat crop, it was not possible to see the incident with specification---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