Umar Daraz alias Muhammad Umar vs Mst — 2025 YLR 1284 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

Umar Daraz alias Muhammad Umar VS Mst. Durdana Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Accused were charged for committing murder of the complainant then injured and his companion by firing---It was clearly mentioned in the FIR that the deceased and the eye-witness were present in Mohallah when the occurrence took place---However, the eye-witness claimed that by that time, all the three were sitting in his scrap shop, a place which did not even find mention in the site plan---It was mentioned in the FIR that upon reaching at the spot, the culprits immediately started firing at the complainant party, a fact implying that no altercation took place prior to the occurrence---However, the eye-witness remained steadfast in asserting that it was after an oral altercation between him and the accused that the occurrence subsequently took place---Report in unequivocal terms stated that deceased, after being shot at the spot, was shifted to the hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries in the trauma room---Notwithstanding that fact, the eye-witness claimed that after being fired at by the assailants, companion of complainant died on the spot---In view of this, testimony of eye-witness was not only contrary to the facts apparent on the record, but also self-contradictory, because the report, which was seconded by him, mentioned otherwise---Eye-witness further stated that after receiving injuries, he took deceased to the hospital, while complainant then injured was shifted to the hospital by the people of the locality---Eye-witness claimed that the two were separately shifted to the hospital---Nonetheless, when the scribe was cross-examined, he negated that fact, stating that the two were brought to the hospital together---Although, it was mentioned in the report that both the deceased were shifted to the hospital in injured conditions by their relatives, however, the eye-witness denied that, stating that the people of the locality who shifted them to the hospital---Prosecution had been unable to prove the charge against the appellant---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Umar Daraz alias Muhammad Umar vs Mst — 2025 YLR 1284 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR