Zafar Iqbal alias Ilam Din vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1159 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Zafar Iqbal alias Ilam Din VS State Ss. 302(b), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, grievous hurt committed by a person who knows or has reason to believe that the hurt will cause the death of the person against whom the act is committed, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Depositions of witnesses and documentary evidence---Confliction---Accused were charged that they entered into the house of complainant, caused injuries to the inmates and also committed murder of the nephew of complainant---Deposition of Investigating Officer conflicted with documentary evidence---Investigating Officer deposed that after receiving the copy of the FIR at 06:50 a.m. he proceeded to hospital, whereas the death certificate revealed that the dead body was received by Investigating Officer and his mobile number and CNIC number was also written under his signatures---In the deposition of the Investigating Officer, he mentioned that he received FIR at about 6.50 a.m. and thereafter, he proceeded to hospital and prepared the inquest report---In column No. 3 of the inquest report, the date and time of receiving death information was mentioned as 2:00 a.m. on 08.12.2020---Had the inquest report been prepared after registration of FIR and the Investigating Officer had received its copy, then he would have mentioned the FIR number and its detail in the inquest report at the time of preparing the inquest report---Investigating Officer was not in a position to mention the number of FIR which was lodged on 08.12.2020 at 6:30 a.m.---Same was the position of postmortem report wherein the time of receiving of the dead body was mentioned as 05:00 a.m. and police documents were received at 11:40 a.m. on 08.12.2020---Similarly, the time, i.e., 11:40 a.m. on 08.12.2020, was mentioned on the application for postmortem examination of the dead body of deceased---Had he received the FIR, the Investigating Officer would have mentioned the particulars of FIR on the face of the inquest report---Entire prosecution evidence and circumstances showed that there had been some wrangling about the time of the case's registration---Thus, there were serious doubts regarding the prosecution story's genuineness, including the offenders' names and eye-witnesses---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Zafar Iqbal alias Ilam Din vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1159 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR