Muhammad Rafique vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 169 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Muhammad Rafique VS State Ss. 302(b), 460, 147, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, person jointly concerned in lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Motive, not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant by firing---Motive of the occurrence was stated to be the visit of accused at the house of his father-in-law before marriage---After perusal of the entire record of the case as well as evidence of the parties produced before the Trial Court, it transpired that the motive of the case alleged by the complainant in his report was the deceased's visit to the father-in law's house, but he did not state a single word in his report that the present accused called the relatives and accused persons there and made an unlawful assembly and started a quarrel with the deceased---Two eye-witnesses stated in their statement before the Trial Court that when the accused, "G" made firing upon the deceased, all the accused said that they prohibited the deceased from visiting his father-in-law's house before marriage---One of the eye-witnesses stated in her statement that due to their tradition, after the engagement, the groom used to visit the house of his father-in-law, and whenever the deceased visited her house, the present accused, who had a shop adjacent to her house, used to call relatives and accused persons including accused "G" and whenever deceased would leave the house the accused persons used to quarrel with him---According to the said witness, she was a parda nasheen lady, and she did not meet with strangers, therefore, how could it be possible that she found the present accused at the time of calling the other accused persons about the visiting of the deceased at her house---Even otherwise, said witness did not state a single word that she herself did see the present accused at the time of calling the other accused persons about deceased's visit to his father-in-law's house---Thus, motive of the occurrence against the present accused had not been proved---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Muhammad Rafique vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 169 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR