Ghulam Qadir vs State Injured witness, evidence of — 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Ghulam Qadir VS State Injured witness, evidence of---Scope---Mere presence of injury on the person of prosecution witness does not stamp him to be a truthful witness. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Ocular account and medical evidence---Conflictions---accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing fire arm injuries to complainant and his sister---as per statements of complainant and eye-witnesses as well as application for registration of the case, F.I.R and complaint, injured sister of complainant received firearm injury at her left shin/calf whereas Women Medial Officerwho conducted her medical examination clearly stated that kind of weapon used was "blunt"---Said fact on the one hand negated the ocular version to the extent of said injury and on the other hand raised question mark about the testimony of complainant and witnesses---as per site plan, "H" was the point from where accused fired shot at deceased and distance between them had been mentioned as 3-feet---If length of barrel of the rifle as well as length of arm were deducted from three feet, then it became very close range which resulted burning on the entry wound but burning was not present on the entry wound of the deceased---So when all the said factors were taken into consideration in totality, then it was crystal clear that though witnesses had been mentioned as injured witnesses but they had suppressed the actual facts and their testimonies were neither confidence inspiring nor truthful hence not reliable---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of seven and half hours in conducting postmortem on the dead body of the deceased---Scope---accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing fire arm injuries to complainant and his sister---as per FIR, deceased of the case died on the way while being taken to the hospital, meaning thereby that deceased died before registration of the case i.e. 09:05 p.m. on 25.06.2016 whereas post-mortem examination was conducted on dead body of deceased at 5:00 a.m. on 26.06.2016 while dead body as well as police documents were received at 4:00 a.m. on 26.06.2026---Meaning thereby that post-mortem examination was conducted after about nine and half hours of the occurrence and after about seven and half hours of registration of the case as per case of the prosecution---So, it was crystal clear that post-mortem examination had been conducted with delay and reason for such delay was very much clear from the statement of Medical Officer that police papers were handed over to the doctor at 04:00 a.m.---Such state of affairs clearly showed that police papers for autopsy were not promptly prepared and time was consumed for consultation, deliberation and tailoring story for registration of the case which resulted into preparation of documents for autopsy with delay and ultimately conducted post-mortem examination with delay---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Recovery of Kalashnikov and crime empties of .9mm---Scope---accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing firearm injuries to complainant and his sister---according to application for registration of the case, F.I.R and complaint as well as statements of complainant and other eye-witnesses, neither any accused was equipped with Kalashnikov nor with .9mm pistol---Strange enough that empties of .9mm pistol and Kalashnikov were recovered from the spot---Question did not arise that who used Kalashnikov and .9mm pistol at the place of occurrence---.9mm pistol was subsequently recovered from the possession of the complainant---In such state of affairs when cross-firing had been admitted by the complainant in his statement before the Court, the availability of empties of .9mm pistol and Kalashnikov clearly showed that actual facts had been suppressed by the prosecution witnesses---Complainant produced Kalashnikov before the Investigating Officer while mentioning that same was snatched from accused on the day of occurrence but as per application for registration of the case, F.I.R and complaint, accused was armed with pump action.12-bore gun and not with Kalashnikov, hence same was also dishonest improvement on the part of the prosecution---Furthermore, complainant in application for registration of case mentioned that brother of complainant/injured was being taken to the hospital in injured condition who succumbed to the injuries on the way but said fact had clearly been negated by hospital record, which reflected that deceased was brought in the hospital in injured condition where medical treatment was given to him---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---No document presented to establish injury sustained by accused---Suppression of facts---accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing firearm injuries to complainant and his sister---Record showed that it was mentioned in the application for registration of the case, FIR and complaint that appellant and acquitted co-accused also received firearm injuries by the firing of their co-accused persons---Prosecution witnesses did not point out the place of receipt of firearm injuries by said accused to Investigation Officer and draftsman at the time of preparation of site plan of place of occurrence and any point to show that where accused received injuries, where their blood fell and where was their blood trail was not available in the site plan prepared by police as well as by draftsman---Said witnesses also did not disclose rather suppressed that who shifted said accused persons from the place of occurrence to the hospital and where and when they were medically examined---Prosecution even did not disclose that where were their Medico-Legal Examination Certificates, who Medical Officer medically examined them and issued their Medico-Legal Examination Certificates and even any Medical Officer who medically examined/treated said accused persons was neither cited as witness nor examined during trial of the case---Said all things had been suppressed/concealed by the complainant and other prosecution witnesses of ocular account---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State S. 417---appeal against acquittal---Scope---acquittal cannot be disturbed for the reason that another view is equally possible---after acquittal, accused attains double presumption of innocence and same can only be disturbed/interfered with if it is capricious, fanciful, perverse, speculative, artificial or arbitrary. Your Search returned total 35531 records from 5900 - 5950 Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Dishonest improvement---Scope---If prosecution witness including injured witness introduces dishonest improvement in order to strengthen the case, then his evidence is to be thrown away altogether and cannot be relied upon. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Medical evidence---Scope---Medical evidence is mere supportive/confirmatory type of evidence---Medical evidence can tell about locale, nature, magnitude of injury and kind of weapon used for causing injury but it cannot tell about identity of the assailant who caused the injury, therefore, same neither can provide any corroboration nor is of any help to the prosecution in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single dent/ circumstance in case of prosecution is sufficient for acquittal. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Ghulam Qadir VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 449, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay in lodging FIR---Scope---accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant and also causing firearm injuries to complainant and his sister---as per case of prosecution, occurrence took place at 7:30 p.m. on 25.06.2016 whereas same was reported to the police through written application at the Police Station at 09:05 p.m. when FIR was registered---Distance of place of occurrence from the Police Station was just 16-kilometres as per column No.4 of the FIR---First Information Report which was cornerstone of the case of the prosecution, could not be termed as promptly recorded rather it could be safely said that same was recorded with delay, however, ante-time had been mentioned in the record, and such sort of FIR could not provide any support to the case of prosecution and superstructure i.e. case of prosecution raised on the basis of such sort of FIR was bound to fall---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

Ghulam Qadir vs State Injured witness, evidence of — 2025 YLR 1911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR