Abdul Aziz vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 824 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Abdul Aziz VS State Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Mitigating circumstances---Accused was charged for committing murder of his father-in-law/complainant and causing injuries to his mother-in-law---On assessment of evidence, it was found that the motive had not been proved by the prosecution against the appellants---Moreover, it was observed that there was no previous enmity between the parties---Appellant was the son-in-law of the deceased and he had married his daughter, and out of the wedlock, they had four children---On the day of the unfortunate incident, the appellant allegedly came to the house of the deceased and on refusal by his father-in-law/deceased to allow the appellant to take his wife and the children with him, he took out a pistol and made firing upon him and mother-in-law due to which his father-in-law and his mother-in-law received bullet injuries---However, the prosecution had failed to establish that there was any previous domestic issue between the appellant and his wife, and in that regard, the prosecution failed to produce the wife of the appellant before the Court as a witness---Moreover, it was observed that the motive set up by the prosecution was quite vague; as such, the motive for the occurrence was not established from the record---These were the mitigating circumstances---Moreover, it was not determinable in the case as to what was the real cause of occurrence and as to what had actually happened immediately before the occurrence, which had resulted in the death of complainant (then injured) and injuries to the injured---If a specific motive is alleged by the prosecution, then it is the duty of the prosecution to establish the said motive through cogent and confidence-inspiring evidence, and not proving of motive may be considered a mitigating circumstance in favour of the accused---Considering the quantum of the sentence, the co-accused who, too, had been nominated in the FIR stood acquitted, and the reasoning behind such acquittal had been found to be convincing; this factor also created mitigation---As such, while maintaining the conviction under S.302(b), P.P.C., the sentence of death awarded to the appellant was altered to imprisonment for life---Since the charges under S.324, P.P.C, had been fully proved, therefore, the conviction and sentence recorded for the same by the Trial Court was upheld---Appeal was dismissed with the said modification in the sentence of the appellant.

Abdul Aziz vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 824 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ