Aurangzeb vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1702 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.

Aurangzeb VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(iii), 337-F(iii), 337-F(iv), 337-F(v), 148 & 149---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa arms act (XXIII of 2013), S. 15---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-hashimah, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, ghayr-jaifah-hashimah, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly, possession of illicit weapon---appreciation of evidence---Withholding material witness---adverse inference---accused were charged for committing murder of two persons of the complainant party and also causing firearm injuries to three persons---Though, the site plan was prepared on the pointation of one "S", but he was not produced---In order to appreciate as to whether said witness was present when the incident occurred and that he was available on the spot when the Investigating Officer arrived, one of the recovery witnesses appeared and explained that he along with witness "S" and one "a" reached to the spot after the occurrence; and on reaching to the spot, the Investigating Officer was present---Said witness did not support the presence of witness "S" on the spot at the time of occurrence and he even did not confirm that the site plan was prepared on the pointation of that witness---On one hand, witness "S" was abandoned, whereas on the other the witness did not support his presence on the spot, so this particular aspect of the case had damaged the prosecution case beyond repair---Prosecution had the choice to produce the witnesses it liked, but at the same time when the best available witness was withheld, then an inference could be drawn that the witness, if produced, would not support the case---On one hand witness "S" was the most important witness, whereas on the other, as many as 03 injured witnesses were not produced---Circumstances established that the prosecution failed to bring home guilt against the appellants---appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Aurangzeb vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1702 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR