Khalil Ahmad vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 116 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.

Khalil Ahmad VS State Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of the eye-witnesses at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Chance witnesses---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which the brother and servant of the complainant were hit and died---Ocular account in the case was furnished by the prosecution through the statements of complainant, his brother and cousin---All the said witnesses claimed that they along with both the deceased were present at the place of occurrence and in their presence the accused persons along with their co-accused made firing upon the deceased---According to the prosecution version, the occurrence took place at 6:00 a.m. and soon thereafter the complainant reached the police station where on his application, FIR was chalked out---Thereafter investigation was entrusted to Incharge Homicide of Police Station who reached the place of occurrence and after completing police papers, he dispatched the dead bodies to mortuary---As per statement of the Medical Officer, the dead body of deceased brother of complainant was received in the mortuary at 11:00 a.m. while dead body of other deceased was received there at 2:00 p.m.---Police papers in respect of both the dead bodies were received at 5:00 p.m. i.e. with a delay of eleven hours after the occurrence---After conducting the postmortem examination, the Medical Officer opined that probable duration between the death and the postmortem examination was about eight to twelve hours---Said aspect straightway raised serious question qua the presence of the eyewitnesses at the spot---Although according to the prosecution version, the accused persons were so callous that they made repeated fire shots upon both the deceased, however, surprisingly they let off the complainant and other witnesses unhurt, who witnessed the occurrence---Such fact knocked mind of the Court that if the assailants were so furious and desperate to commit the occurrence, why they spared the prosecution witnesses, who were none else but real brothers and cousin of the deceased---All the said facts clearly suggested that had the prosecution witnesses been present at the place of occurrence, they must have not been left unhurt by the accused persons---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond any reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Khalil Ahmad vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 116 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR