GHULAM MUSTAFA vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1633 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.

GHULAM MUSTAFA VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of three hours and ten minutes in lodging the FIR---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Occurrence in the case took place on 02.01.2019 at about 06:20 pm but the FIR was lodged on the same day at 09:30 pm, with the delay of about three hours and ten minutes from the occurrence---Distance between the police station and the place of occurrence was only two (02) furlongs---Postmortem examination on the dead-body of the deceased was conducted on 02.01.2019 at about 7:20 pm i.e., earlier to the registration of FIR, which was lodged at 9:30 p.m.---Medical Officer stated in his examination-in-chief that the dead-body of deceased was brought to the Hospital for postmortem examination by the police authorities---Even eyewitness stated in his examination-in-chief that after the occurrence, as soon as, the accused persons decamped from the spot, the patrolling police employees came to the shop of the complainant/place of occurrence---All the said facts showed that the police got information regarding the incident soon after the occurrence but even then the FIR was not lodged till 9:30 pm and the same was lodged after conducting postmortem examination on the dead-body of the deceased---Under the circumstances, it was evident that the FIR was lodged after due deliberations and consultations---Actually the prosecution eye-witnesses were not present at the spot at the relevant time and they had not witnessed the occurrence, therefore, the said delay in lodging the FIR was consumed in procuring the attendance of fake eye-witnesses and concocting a fabricated story of the prosecution---Said gross delay in lodging the FIR had created doubt regarding the truthfulness of the prosecution story---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond the shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

GHULAM MUSTAFA vs State Ss — 2025 SCMR 1633 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR