Kiran Ehsan vs State S — 2026 MLD 65 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.

Kiran Ehsan VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Dying declaration---Doubtful---Accused was charged for committing murder of the daughter of the complainant by administering her poisonous tea---Case in hand mainly hinged upon the dying declaration attributed to deceased, which had allegedly been made by her before four witnesses and also before the Medical Officer, who conducted her medical examination in injured condition---Medical Officer before whom the patient is brought or if such incident is reported to the Officer-in-Charge Police Station, both the Medical Officer on duty and the Officer-in-Charge Police Station are bound down to give the intimation in that regard to a nearest Magistrate and at the same time, the Medical Officer shall record the statement of the injured person immediately on arrival, so as to ascertain the circumstances and cause of his injuries and on arrival of the Magistrate, if the patient is still in a position to make a statement, would also record his statement---Machinery of law was set into motion in this case by father of the deceased, but he not only stayed away from the dock but also did not file the private complaint and it was in fact filed by his other daughter---Alleged dying declaration was made by deceased in critical condition, when she was taken to hospital by four witnesses, out of whom, two were not produced by the prosecution, whereas only two witnesses appeared before the Trial Court---While deposing before the Trial Court, both the said witnesses had reiterated their earlier stance that the declarant apprised them that it was appellant, who had served her poisonous tea---Sister of deceased also deposed before the Trial Court that the injured was firstly taken to Police Station and a witness "RMA" also reached there and the injured, stated that she had been served poisonous tea by her co-teacher/appellant---Surprising enough neither said "RMA" appeared before the Trial Court nor there was any statement of any Police Official to the effect that injured had made any declaration before him---Similarly, another witness "MS" deposed before the Trial Court that he along with his nephew reached at Police Station on motorcycle and "RMA" had also reached there---Injured and her brother and sister also arrived there---Sister of injured sat outside the main gate of Police Station and brother of injured called two Police Officials there and on asking by the Police Officials, sister of injured told them that due to strained relationship appellant had administered poisonous tea and the AEO had already reconciled in between her and appellant---So, according to that witness the alleged declaration was made by injured in presence of two Police Officials but as observed earlier, the entire case was silent at the end of the police, where no Police Official had written/recorded that statement, nor any Police Official while deposing before the Trial Court had admitted the factum that any statement was ever made by injured in front of them---Perusal of the contents of the Medico Legal Certificate revealed that in the relevant column of history, it was neither alleged that said statement was in fact made by injured to the Medical Officer nor it was mentioned that who had prepared the tea or made the injured drink it---Medical Officer, while deposing before the Trial Court, did not speak a word about any such statement by the deceased (in injured condition)---In cross-examination, while admitting that, she had not named the appellant in her statement to the effect that at any point of time, the deceased had claimed that it was the present appellant, who had administered her the poisonous tea---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case 'beyond reasonable doubt'---Appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

Kiran Ehsan vs State S — 2026 MLD 65 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD