Muhammad Ishtiaq vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 901 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Citation: 2025 YLR 901 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2025
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Muhammad Ishtiaq vs State Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 17; S. 13---C; S. 103---L; S. 103; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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

Muhammad Ishtiaq VS State Ss. 458 & 392---Offence against Property (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance (XLVII of 1985), S.17(3)---arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint, robbery, haraabah, possession of illegal weapon---appreciation of evidence---Non-association of private witnesses---Inconsequential---Police witnesses, evidence of---Reliance---accused was charged that he along with his co-accused entered into the house of complainant and robbed different articles on gun point---allegedly, the police did not associate any independent witness during the course of recovery proceedings from accused which was a violation of the provisions of S.103 Cr.P.C.---However, non-compliance of said provision did not factually undermine the prosecution case---Courts have consistently laid down the principle of law regarding the competency of the Police Officials as witnesses and emphasized that their testimonies should not be discarded solely due to their affiliation with the police force---Furthermore, the defense had failed to point out any enmity or prejudice of police or any witness against the convict-appellant---Generally, the public remain reluctant to get involved because of having no direct grievance against the accused and because of lack of security and protection for witnesses---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt, however, due to mitigating circumstances, the appellant's sentence of seven years was reduced to the period already served---appeal was partly allowed with said modification in sentence.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANAbdul Malik VS State S. 497---Bail order---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in a bail order are tentative in nature and sam…
2025 YLR 1778 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSarwat Bibi VS Muhammad Idrees Kiani Double presumption of innocence---Scope---after acquittal, an accused carries double presumption of inn…
2025 YLR 451 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREEjaz Ahmed VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person, then…
2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt in…
2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Qutubuddin Jakhrani VS State Minor contradictions---Scope---Where in…
2025 YLR 2329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMrs. Rehana Khatoon VS M/s Delsol the School S.15---Eviction petition---Maintain-ability---Landlord being represented through attorney---Eff…

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