AMIR KHAN vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1572 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.

AMIR KHAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 302(c)---Qatl-i-amd---Re-appraisal of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Petitioner allegedly committed murder of the deceased by firing---On a meticulous appraisal of the evidence on record, it was evident that the occurrence took place at the spur of the moment without any premeditation or prior enmity between the deceased and the petitioner/convict---Deceased, who, was accompanied by his brothers and cousin, approached the petitioner's shop and initiated a confrontation that escalated into physical grappling---In an instinctive reaction to the perceived threat to his person, the petitioner resorted to the use of a firearm---However, as the deceased was unarmed at the time of the occurrence, therefore, the act of firing a shot even if in self-defence exceeded the bounds of lawful self-defence as contemplated under the law---In cases where the accused, while acting in self-defence or under sudden provocation, caused the death of a person, such circumstances may justify a conviction under Section 302(c), P.P.C.---Yet there was another fact that if the deceased had not visited the shop of the petitioner/convict, the occurrence would not have taken place---Case in hand was surely a case of lack of premeditation, the incident was one of a sudden fight which was the result of heat of passion developed upon a sudden quarrel and no undue advantage had been taken by the petitioner/convict nor had he acted in brutal or unusual manner---In the circumstances, Exception 4 contained in the erstwhile Section 300, P.P.C., squarely stood attracted to this case---In view of the totality of circumstances including the absence of premeditation, the sudden and spontaneous nature of the occurrence, the fact that only a single shot was fired by the petitioner/convict, the unarmed status of the deceased and the consistency between the ocular and medical evidence, Court was persuaded to hold that the case of the petitioner squarely fell within the ambit of Section 302(c), P.P.C.---Conviction of the petitioner/convict recorded under Section 302(b), P.P.C through the impugned judgment was altered to one under Section 302(c), P.P.C.---Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to the petitioner/convict was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for fourteen years---Consequently, the jail petition was converted into an appeal and was partly allowed.

AMIR KHAN vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1572 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR