ALTAF HUSSAIN vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1427 SUPREME-COURT

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

ALTAF HUSSAIN VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 148 & 149---Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, possessing illicit weapon---Reappraisal of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and causing firearm injuries to injured witness---Ocular account was furnished by the complainant, injured and a witness, and out of them, the former two eye-witnesses were the brothers of the deceased---Depositions of the eye-witnesses were consistent and corroborative with each other on all material particulars, including the day, date, time and place of occurrence, as well as the mode and manner in which the deceased was fatally injured and done to death by the appellant through firing from a Kalashnikov---Eye-witnesses also provided a coherent and credible account regarding the firearm injuries sustained by injured as a result of firing by the absconding co-accused---Although the occurrence took place at night time, however, all the eyewitnesses had consistently stated that the area was sufficiently illuminated by an electric bulb installed outside the house of a witness, thereby enabling them to clearly identify the appellant and his co-accused---Presence of the appellant and co-accused at the crime scene had been unequivocally confirmed by witness, outside whose house the incident took place---Eye-witnesses were subjected to rigorous cross-examination, but nothing material could be elicited to cast doubt on their credibility or contradict their version---Presence of injured having firearm injuries, stood as un-refuted physical evidence supporting the ocular account---Likewise, the presence of the complainant and eye-witness at the crime spot at the time of occurrence had been plausibly explained and remained un-impeached during cross-examination---Medical evidence adduced by Medical Officer, who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased, fully corroborated the ocular account of the prosecution's case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved the charge of murder against the accused---As regards the injury caused to injured, the specific role of firing at injured was attributed to the absconding co-accused---Therefore, the conviction of the accused under Section 324, P.P.C., was not sustainable in law, thus was set-aside---Appeal was partly allowed.

ALTAF HUSSAIN vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1427 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR