PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1584 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Muhammad Juman vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1584 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 1584 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1584 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Muhammad Juman vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal

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

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1584 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Muhammad Juman VS State Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Identification of the accused persons not doubted---Accused were charged for committing murder of two brothers of complainant by inflicting fatal injuries---Entire prosecution case showed that appellants were already known to the witnesses, altleast by face, and on various occasions due to their playing tape recorder at high pitch, complaints were made by the residents, including the complainant against them with their employer "SM", but he never took action against them---Resultantly, on the same controversy, on the day of incident before the eyes of witnesses, they attacked and murdered two persons---Investigating Officer in his evidence had confirmed that he had arrested appellants on pointation of complainant, meaning thereby they were known to the complainant, and it was he who had identified and informed the police about them, and they at his instance had been arrested---Thus, there was no chance of misidentification of the accused, not the least when the incident took place in a broad daylight in the area where both parties had been living---Other Investigating Officer had also confirmed in his evidence that he had arrested one of the appellants on disclosure and pointation of complainant---Such evidence read with evidence of complainant and two eye-witnesses left no room for making a guess that the appellants had been misidentified or they were not the actual culprits but had been substituted by the complainant party for real culprits---Besides, all the eye-witnesses had identified the appellants in the Court to be the same culprits---Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

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