Rajesh Masih vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 2660 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.

Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of 01 day, 03 hours and 15 minutes in lodging the FIR---Consequential---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---Occurrence took place on 06.05.2019 at about 07.00 p.m., FIR was got registered on 07.05.2019 at 10.15 p.m., that was with the delay of 01 day, 03 hours and 15 minutes without any cogent explanation---In that view of the matter, the delay of about twenty eight hours in lodging the FIR in the peculiar circumstances of the case was significant and persuaded the Court to take a cautious approach while evaluating the prosecution evidence in arriving at a just decision---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of motorcycle---Inconsequential---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---Record showed that motorcycle, allegedly left by the accused at the place of occurrence, was recovered---Though motorcycle was seized by the Investigating Officer from the place of occurrence but no concrete evidence was presented to establish that it belonged to the accused, hence, recovery of motorcycle had no bearing effects upon the case of the prosecution---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account and medical evidence---Conflictions---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---as per complaint the injured received injuries on his neck at the time of occurrence, however, complainant while recording his statement clarified that when the injured was shifted to DHQ Hospital, the witnesses also noticed injuries on his back, however, the Medico-Legal Certificate of the injured was crystal clear of the fact that injured sustained four injuries and locales of those injuries also did not coincide with the narrations of the witnesses of ocular account---Slightest conflict in the medical and ocular account totally ruined the case of the prosecution---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive not proved---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---Motive behind the occurrence was the demand of the injured who asked for the return of Rs. 10,000/- which he lent to the accused---admittedly, the projected motive remained unproved as no legally admissible evidence was led by the prosecution in its support---Besides that there were conflicting statements of witnesses regarding the canvassed motive as complainant while appearing as witness admitted that the alleged amount of Rs.10,000/- was not given in his presence nor did the injured tell him about that prior to the occurrence---Same was the case with injured who during cross-examination admitted that he did not remember the date when he gave Rs.10,000/- to the accused---Even during arguments, Law Officer failed to draw the attention of the Court towards any evidence from which it might be held that motive was duly proved by the prosecution, so the motive lost its legal worth---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-recovery of weapon of offence from the accused---Consequential---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---Both in complaint and the FIR, it was specifically mentioned that the accused was armed with a churri at the eventful time, with which he inflicted injuries upon injured, however, it was observed that when the accused was arrested and produced before the Magistrate for obtaining his physical remand, the police's request for remand was denied based on a conciliatory statement from the complainant---as a result therefore, the accused was sent to judicial custody and no churri was recovered at the instance of the petitioner, so the absence of the churri, which was a crucial piece of evidence linking the accused to the crime, undermined the case of the prosecution---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Rajesh Masih VS State Ss. 324 & 337-F(ii)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifahbadi'ah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Site plan of no help to the prosecution case---accused was charged for causing injuries to the nephew of complainant by inflicting knife blows---Eye-witnesses claimed that upon their arrival, accused while brandishing the knife ran towards left side of the house, however, complainant during cross-examination himself admitted that there were no stairs on that side---Now, the question of pivotal importance arose that how petitioner escaped unhurt after taking jump from the rooftop towards the vacant plot and ranaway comfortably after leaving his motorcycle at the spot---Similarly, in the un-scaled site plan which was got prepared by the Investigating Officer on the instructions of the complainant, only two points were mentioned therein i.e. point No.a, where the injured sustained injuries and point No. B where the motorcycle of the accused was standing and surprisingly, no reference to the place where the witnesses were standing was made in the same, hence, un-scaled site plan was of no help to the case of the prosecution---Criminal revision petition against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Rajesh Masih vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 2660 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR