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

Sahib Zaman vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 2298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 2298 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Sahib Zaman vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 15---Q; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act (XXIII of 2013)

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

Sahib Zaman VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 201 & 34---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act (XXIII of 2013), S. 15---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-hashimah, causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information to screen an offender, possession of illicit weapon---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of complainant by firing and causing injuries to an eye-witness---Admittedly, complainant was not eye-witness of the occurrence---Complainant had not disclosed the source of his information that who had informed him about the firing being made on his deceased father except a mere assertion in his cross-examination that he was informed about the occurrence telephonically---However, in the same breath, complainant deposed that he did not provide any mobile phone number to the Investigating Officer, via which he had allegedly received the information---Complainant deposed in his initial statement that three assailants had made firing upon the complainant-party, however, as per version of injured it was appellant who had made firing upon the deceased while the two other accused were shown present on the spot duly equipped with pistols---Therefore, both the star witnesses of the prosecution contradicted each other on material aspect of the case, therefore, their testimonies were of no help to the prosecution qua guilt of the appellant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, his conviction could not be maintained---Resultantly, appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

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