Syed Abdul Basit Shah vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 101 ISLAMABAD

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

Syed Abdul Basit Shah VS State Ss. 302(b), 109, 201 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Scope---Accused was charged that he and his co-accused persons committed murder of the daughter of complainant---First Information Report as well as the statement of complainant made it abundantly clear that no specific role whatsoever had been assigned either to the present appellant or to the proclaimed offenders/husband of deceased---Complainant deposed that on 23.09.2021 at about 11:00 P.M., brother of his son in-law telephonically informed him that his daughter had a heart attack as a consequence of which she expired---Initially in his complaint, complainant did not mention the cause of the deceased's death, but subsequently through a supplementary statement, which was recorded on 15.11.2022 (i.e. after more than 12 months of the occurrence), he claimed the cause of death to be the result of putting pillow etc. on the deceased's neck and by pressing her neck---Complainant attributed maltreatment and cruelty to the in-laws of his deceased daughter---In the cross-examination, the said witness deposed that in the year 2012, the deceased got married with the proclaimed offender and since then she lived with her husband in Saudi Arabia until 2017---Deceased did not file any complaint in Saudi Arabia while in the company of her husband and he unequivocally admitted that his deceased daughter had not filed any complaint before any Court or forum regarding any alleged maltreatment by her in-laws or for recovery of maintenance, khulla or dissolution of marriage---Complainant also admitted that he had filed a petition under S.491, Cr.P.C, twice; the subject matter of the first application was resolved through intervention of the Presiding Officer and lawyers, whereas the second application was dismissed after the deceased had appeared before the Court and made a statement to the effect that she was quite comfortable with her in-laws---Complainant admitted that he did not challenge the dismissal order of his petition under S.491, Cr.P.C, before the High Court---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Syed Abdul Basit Shah vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 101 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR