BASHIR AHMED vs State S — 2025 YLR 1042 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation: 2025 YLR 1042 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court: Balochistan High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: YLR
Parties: BASHIR AHMED vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 302; S. 161---A; S. 161; Qatl-i-amd--- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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

Judgment text as reported

BASHIR AHMED VS State S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 161---Appreciation of evidence---Delay of two months and twenty days in recording the statement of witness---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant---Record showed that the appellant and one "EB" brought the injured to the hospital---Appellant and deceased were also doing labor work at the house of "EB"---Name of said witness was not given in the FIR nor in the site plan---Said witness, despite witnessing the incident, remained silent for nearly two months and twenty days from the alleged occurrence and did not report the matter to the police despite the fact that he stated in his cross-examination that he was acquainted with the local police---Said witness further stated in cross-examination that his motor garage was at a distance of two minutes on foot from the police station---Investigation Officer also stated during cross-examination that he was already known to said witness---Had said witness been present at the spot and time of the alleged occurrence, he must have informed the police about the occurrence, which admittedly was not done---Statement under S. 161, Cr.P.C., of the said witness was also recorded on 30.05.2022, i.e. after a delay of two months and twenty days of the alleged occurrence---Prosecution failed to furnish any plausible explanation in that regard---Such aspect of the case rendered the case extremely doubtful---Such delay in recording the statement of witness was fatal to the prosecution and was not worthy of reliance---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANAbdul Malik VS State S. 497---Bail order---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in a bail order are tentative in nature and sam…
2025 YLR 1778 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSarwat Bibi VS Muhammad Idrees Kiani Double presumption of innocence---Scope---after acquittal, an accused carries double presumption of inn…
2025 YLR 451 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREEjaz Ahmed VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person, then…
2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt in…
2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Qutubuddin Jakhrani VS State Minor contradictions---Scope---Where in…
2025 YLR 2329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMrs. Rehana Khatoon VS M/s Delsol the School S.15---Eviction petition---Maintain-ability---Landlord being represented through attorney---Eff…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English