Citation Name: 2025 YLR 604 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Lutaf Ali vs State S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 604 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Lutaf Ali VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Accused was charged for committing murder of wife of complainant by causing her knife/dagger injuries---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by three eye-witnesses including complainant---Complainant was husband of the deceased who stated that on 02.01.2019 at about 01.40 pm he was returning from hospital with his wife/deceased, however, when they reached the gate of a school, he came across his son-in-law/accused---Accused asked the deceased where his wife was who was the complainant's daughter---When his wife/deceased replied that he did not know then the accused took out a knife and caused blows to his wife's abdomen and other parts of her body---Complainant was related to the deceased and also to the accused however no enmity or dispute had been proven between complainant and the appellant---Thus, mere relationship to the deceased was no reason to discard his evidence which had to be judged on its own worth---Complainant also knew the appellant before the incident which took place in broad day light as the appellant was his son-in-law---Incident went on for about five minutes and the complainant/eye-witness was close to the incident and would have got a good look at the appellant whom he already knew---Thus, there was no case of mistaken identity and no need to hold an identification parade in order to determine the identity of the appellant---Complainant was not a chance witness as he was the husband of the deceased and had every reason to be with her at the time of the incident---Complainant reported the incident immediately to the police in detail and also lodged his FIR with relative promptitude based on the particular facts and circumstances of the case which was not materially improved upon during the course of his evidence---Complainant named the appellant in his FIR with a specific role along with the other eye-witnesses---Complainant gave his evidence was found in a natural manner and was not dented at all during a lengthy cross-examination and as such his evidence was found to be reliable, trust worthy and confidence inspiring and was believable especially in respect of the identity of the appellant who murdered his wife---Other eye-witness, who was the brother-in-law of the complainant and brother of the deceased stated that on 02.01.2019 he met the complainant and his sister/deceased at the gate of a hospital---Said witness corroborated the evidence of the complainant in all material respects---Said witness was not a chance witness as he had every reason to accompany his sister and her husband to home from the hospital---Another eye-witness knew the complainant, his wife/deceased and her brother as they all used to live in the same village---According to the evidence of said witness, he had gone to NADRA office and when he reached the main gate of a school on 02.01.2019 at 01.40 pm he saw the complainant, his wife/deceased and witness, whereafter he heard cries and saw the accused causing knife blows to the deceased---Said witness then helped to take the deceased to hospital---Said witness had no enmity or ill will with the appellant and had no reason to implicate him in a false case---Medical evidence and medical reports fully supported the eye-witness/ prosecution evidence in that the deceased received at least 3 stab wounds on the abdomen and 2 other incised injuries which led to her death---Appeal against conviction on two counts was dismissed except his acquittal to the extent of the murder of the unborn child.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 604 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Lutaf Ali vs State S — 2025 YLR 604 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR