Said Fareen vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 354 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

Said Fareen VS State Ss. 302, 324, 353, 341, 436, 427, 189, 147, 148, 149 & 500---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Murderous assault---Cross-version---Scope---Accused-petitioners being armed protestors were charged for violent confrontation with police culminating in the attack on the local police station, which caused the death of one individual, with multiple injuries to others---Petitioner moved an application to the police for registration of counter FIR against local officials and administrative authorities---Upon non-action, the petitioner invoked S.22-A, Cr.P.C before the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace who directed the registration of cross-version---Trial Court, however, discharged the respondents and annulled the cross version---Validity---Perusal of the final report submitted by the prosecution revealed that the petitioner, despite repeated notices, did not appear before the Investigating Officer either for spot identification or for recording his statement under S.161, Cr.P.C, in relation to the allegations made in his application under S.22-A, Cr.P.C.---Petitioner had also failed to appear before Joint Investigation Team (JIT) in a timely manner---When petitioner finally did, he neither produced any evidence in support of allegations nor could he respond satisfactorily to the Joint Investigation Team's queries---Furthermore, the statements of the injured and relatives of the deceased initially affirming the petitioner's claims under S.22-A, Cr.P.C., were later amended, thus, introducing ambiguity and inconsistency in the petitioner's version---Report further clarified that the respondent (Inspector) was present at the police station at the relevant time, respondent (ASI) was on duty and (HC/LHC) was posted at check post of Police Station---Statements of private individuals recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. had been placed on record---Said statements confirmed that those involved in the firing during protest were private individuals and not Police Officials---Final report also noted that protest led by petitioner involved armed private gunmen---Notably, one of them had seven FIRs registered against him between 2013-2022---Statement dated 17.02.2024 of a taxi driver, had been recorded and filed, who deposed that he did not witness any Police Official firing during the protest nor did he attribute his leg injury to the police---All these elements lent support to the prosecution's stance during the investigation and did not sufficiently connect the accused with the commission of the alleged offence in the cross-version report---Upon perusal of the forgoing circumstances, it became manifest that cross-version report in relation to FIR lacked cogent, convincing, and credible evidence to displace or casted aspersions upon the narrative encapsulated in said FIR, which was registered against the petitioner and his co-accused---Cross version instead appeared to be post-facto fabrication, ostensibly concocted with ulterior motive of crating counter-narrative to absolve the petitioner of liability rather than emerging from any genuine or independent evidentiary basis---Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Said Fareen vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 354 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD