Khuda Bakhsh vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 2521 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.

Khuda Bakhsh VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a, 337-D, 337-F, 147, 148 & 149---Police Rules, 1934, R. 24.1---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah, jaifah, causing hurt, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---First Information Report lodged after investigation---accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which three persons died whereas there sustained firearm injuries---alleged incident took place on 08.01.2022, on the said date without registration of FIR, the Investigating Officer of the case arrived at the site along with many other Police Officials and commenced with the investigation of the case by referring the injured to the Hospital, preparing site map, collecting empties, preparing recovery memos. and sealing the empties in parcel, collecting the bloodstained earth, recording the statements without lodging the FIR, which was lodged on 10.01.2022 two days after the full-fledged investigation---Despite getting knowledge of commission of a cognizable offence, the Investigating Officer or any other Police Officer did not register the FIR of a cognizable offence---There was no justification for delaying the registration of FIR---Even, if the complainant party was reluctant to lodge the FIR, the SHO of the concerned police station could have lodged the FIR, as it was incumbent upon SHO concerned to record the FIR of a cognizable offence under S.154, Cr.P.C., and then to investigate the case---Section 154, Cr.P.C., and Rule 24.1 of the Police Rules, 1934, used the word "shall" making it incumbent upon the Police Officer to register FIR into prescribed register---Said mandatory provisions of law indicated that the police authority had failed to perform its statutory duty under S.154, Cr.P.C., and 24.1 of Police Rules, 1934, therefore, the delay occurring in the registration of FIR had benefited the appellants---Main object of the prompt FIR was to rule out the possibility of deliberation, consultation and inquiry as there was tendency to involve innocent people during the interval---In the instant case, the investigation even before the FIR, which was against the dictum the investigation followed FIR, but in the instant case, the FIR had followed the investigation, which was a material illegality committed by the police authorities---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

Khuda Bakhsh vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 2521 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR