Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 633 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rehman Bacha vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 633 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rehman Bacha VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account not proved---Identification of accused not established---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother-in-law of complainant by firing---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by two eye-witnesses---One of the eye-witnesses was friend of the deceased---Said witness admitted in his cross-examination that he did not know the name of the accused before the incident and had not even seen him before that---Name of accused was disclosed to the said witness after his quarrel with the deceased---In his S. 161 Cr.P.C statement said witness gave no hulia or description of the appellant as the person whom he saw shooting the deceased---Said witness was only told the name of the appellant by someone who did not give evidence, whose name may or may not have been correct---It was imperative for the prosecution to have conducted an identification parade to be sure that it was in fact the appellate who was seen by the said witness murdering the deceased by firearm---However no such identification parade was ever held---Other eye-witness was the son of the deceased, however, in his evidence, said witness stated that he took his father to the hospital alone and tried to talk to his father to inquire as to who had fired on him, and he was talking but he did not take the name of any person---Thus, if said eye-witness had seen and knew who had shot his father, it begged the question as to why he asked his father about the identity of person who had fired on him---Said witness admitted during his cross-examination that he had not even seen the accused before the incident which again begged the question how he knew the identity of the accused who he had not seen before---Therefore, reliance could not be placed on such eye-witness as to the correct identification of the person who murdered the deceased---Thus, the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 633 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Rehman Bacha vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 633 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ