MUHAMMAD ASGHAR vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1616 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.

MUHAMMAD ASGHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 352 & 354---Qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force used against someone, except when there is grave and sudden provocation, assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of witnesses---Petitioner/accused was charged for committing murder of the husband of complainant by inflicting danda blows and then he subjected complainant and her daughter to physical assault and tore their clothes, in an attempt to outrage their modesty---Record demonstrated that the petitioner was first alleged to have assaulted the deceased, whereupon the four witnesses intervened---From there, the petitioner made his way to the complainant's house where he assaulted her and her daughter, where once again the same witnesses intervened to rescue the complainant and her daughter---If the party of four witnesses was able to intervene both times and managed to restrain the petitioner from continuing his assault upon the deceased and complainant, how was it that he slipped through their fingers twice even though he was not armed with any formidable weapon---Conduct of the witnesses in that regard was perplexing, since they were admittedly greater in number and although unarmed, they managed to intervene---Such intervention naturally required the witnesses to subdue the petitioner and yet he managed to escape---Further, the close blood relation the witnesses had to the deceased and complainant naturally would not permit them to let the petitioner escape in that way---Eyewitnesses might have stated that apprehending the petitioner was difficult given the crowd and confusion at the Adda, especially since there were multiple exits but their failure to apprehend the petitioner despite a second chance to do so at the complainant's home confirmed the unnatural manner in which they acted---Thus, evident that the conduct of the witnesses was unnatural and raised serious doubt about their testimonies and presence at the scene especially in light of their belated inclusion as eyewitnesses and the abandonment of the other named eye-witnesses---Therefore, it would be unsafe to rely upon statements furnished by eye-witnesses---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD ASGHAR vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1616 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR