Muhammad Mumtaz vs State S — 2025 YLR 520 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.

Muhammad Mumtaz VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of the eye-witnesses at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Chance witnesses, evidence of---Reliance---Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife/daughter of complainant by strangulation---Admittedly, complainant was not the witness of the occurrence, rather according to the contents of the FIR, it was his son-in-law, who informed about murder of his daughter by the accused---Said son-in-law of complainant, while appearing in the dock deposed that on 05.09.2013, he along with his brother-in-law went to the dera of "MI" early in the morning, they were sitting in his baithik, and tried to reconcile the matter between the spouses---Deceased wife of accused was standing in the drawing room and in their view the accused started beating deceased with fists and kicks, due to which she fell down and then, he strangulated her with his hands and threatened them of dire consequences and thereafter, telephoned the father-in-law regarding the murder of his daughter---Other eye-witness narrated the incident almost in a similar manner as deposed by first witness---Record showed thatthe said witnesses were not the residents of the village, wherein the alleged occurrence took place---Said witnesses had not advanced any plausible reason qua their visiting the house of the accused and deceased as according to their own version they were not on visiting terms because the accused had contracted marriage with deceased after elopement---In view of the excerpts from the testimonies of both witnesses, there was no doubt that both of them were chance witnesses of the incident as they had not plausibly explained their presence at the crime scene---Testimony of chance witnesses can be relied, if the same is sufficiently corroborated by another independent evidence, which was missing in the present case as there was no corroboration available to the ocular account qua the culpability of the accused---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Muhammad Mumtaz vs State S — 2025 YLR 520 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR