Daulat Khan vs Ibne Amin Ss — 2025 YLR 2627 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.

Daulat Khan VS Ibne Amin Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 337-F(vi), 148 & 149---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing mutalahima, ghairjaifahhashimah, munaqqilah, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Infirmities in prosecution evidence---Accused-appellants were charged for committing murder of the nephew and son of complainant and causing injuries to complainant and his brother through firing---Allegedly, the occurrence took place on 31.08.2014 at 12:00 hours, however, the report was made to the local police at 14:00 hours with two hours delay but such delay had not been properly explained on the record with valid and logical reasons---Similarly, the eye-witnesses including the complainant as well as the injured had recorded their statements under S.164, Cr.P.C, on 06.09.2014, with delay of 06 days and in that regard too there was no plausible explanation on the part of prosecution---Besides, one "S" was charged in the FIR for causing injury allegedly inflicted to an eye-witnesses of the occurrence, but subsequently, his name was replaced with "B", by alleging that his name was inadvertently mentioned in the first information report and his name was deleted from the instant case---Said evidence would depict that the circumstantial evidence in shape of blood-stained articles coupled with postmortem/medical reports of the deceased and the injured were not sufficient to record conviction of the accused/respondents---When substantive evidence fails to connect the accused person with the commission of offence or is disbelieved, corroborative evidence is of no help to the prosecution case as the corroborative evidence can not by itself prove the prosecution's case---Two co-accused, who were arrested in the case, had been acquitted on the same set of evidence and appeal there-against preferred by the complainant was also dismissed---Testimonies of witnesses of ocular account were based on material contradictions and discrepancies, fatal to the case of prosecution---Prosecution alone was under heavy duty to prove the charge against the accused beyond any shadow of doubts---Even a single reasonable doubt is sufficient to record acquittal---Evidence of the prosecution was contradictory regarding the fact of forming of unlawful assembly and its joining by the accused-respondents, therefore, the principle enshrined in S.149, P.P.C., could not be applied to the instant case---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Daulat Khan vs Ibne Amin Ss — 2025 YLR 2627 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR