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

Mehrullah vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 761 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 761 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Mehrullah 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

Mehrullah VS State Ss. 302(b), 337-a, 337-D, 337-F, 337-H(2), 147, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-ammah, jaifah, murderous assault, rash and negligent act to endanger human life or personal safety of others, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---appreciation of evidence---Presence of complainant at the time and place of occurrence not proved---accused was charged that he along with his co-accused persons made a murderous assault upon the complainant party, due to which uncle of complainant died while his father sustained injuries---Complainant of the case mostly reiterated the contents of his fard-e-bayan, but mostly he derailed from his earlier deposition---Statement of complainant transpired that all the accused persons being equipped with sticks and one accused being armed with Kalashnikov attacked upon him, his father and uncle, but surprisingly no injury was received by the complainant---Even otherwise, the prosecution had failed to produce any medical evidence showing that the complainant had received any sort of injury on his person---If the 9/10 culprits being equipped with sticks attacked upon all the three victims, then how was it possible that the complainant did not receive any single injury on his person---Non-production of medical evidence to the extent of complainant had not only made the case of prosecution doubtful, but also his presence at the time of occurrence or witnessing the crime, thus presumption could be drawn without any stretch of imagination that the complainant was not present at the site and he did not witness the crime and that was the reason the FIR was lodged after delay of five hours and even after registration of FIR, he himself through supplementary statement, recorded after two days of occurrence, had nominated the acquitted accused---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

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