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

Rajab Ali vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 493 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 493 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Rajab Ali vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal

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

Rajab Ali VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions and dishonest improvements in the statements of witnesses---Accused were charged that they in furtherance of their common intention committed murder of the son of complainant and caused injuries to his other son---Record showed that the evidence of star-witness of the prosecution i.e. injured witness, who undoubtedly was having the stamp of injury on his person, had already been disbelieved by the trial Court to the extent of culpability of co-accused "TH" with respect to his role of causing injury to deceased---Case of the prosecution, since inception had been that the accused caused Chhura (dagger) blow at the neck of deceased and co-accused "TH" caused dagger below on his left flank, whereas no injury on the person of the deceased had been attributed to other co-accused---On going through the seat of both the injuries, the conclusion was inescapable that the medical evidence was not in-line with the prosecution case rather it contradicted the same, as the injury attributed to both the accused and co-accused at the neck and flank, were not found mentioned in the post-mortem report---Similarly, according to the prosecution case, accused inflicted dagger blow at the flank of injured witness and co-accused's blow of hatchet, stated to have landed on his left thigh, also contradicted with the medical evidence, as observed by Medical Officer, while deposing in the dock---Notably the eye-witnesses had improved their version, while deposing before the Trial Court, in order to bring their testimony in-line with the prosecution case, which could be termed as dishonest improvement---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

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