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---Concealment of facts---Accused were charged for committing murder of the complainant then injured and his companion by firing---Record showed that on the same date, at 04:30 pm, the accused (since dead) had also lodged a report regarding the injuries he allegedly sustained in the incident---Said report was initially reduced into the shape of Daily Diary, which subsequently led to the registration of FIR, under Ss.324/34, P.P.C, at the same police station---Medico-Legal Certificate of injured accused revealed that the nature of his injuries was firearm---Eye-witness also admitted that the said accused was injured and that it was he who charged the complainant party for the injuries he sustained in the incident---Taking into consideration the contents of the FIR of injured accused, his Medico-Legal Certificate, and the admission of the eye-witness, even for a limited purpose, in juxtaposition with the said factual background of the case, it could be safely concluded that the complainant party of the case concealed the real facts, and that, in fact, it was a case of open gunfight between the parties---Notably, the injured accused also concealed in his report the fatal wounds sustained by complainant, then injured, and deceased---Therefore, it had been established that both the parties attributed the role of assault to the adversarial party while concealing the real facts and attempting to cover up their own role in causing injuries to members of the rival party---Moreover, the case indeed was of cross version---However, the question fundamental to the fate of the case as to which party was the aggressor and which was aggressed upon remained unanswered, as the factum of sustaining the firearm injuries by both sides was concealed---Effect of concealing the real facts pertaining to the injuries sustained by the adversarial party had, on numerous occasions, been considered in favour of the accused---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