Habib-ur-Rahman vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 152 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.

Habib-ur-Rahman VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 494---Qatl-i-amd---Effect of withdrawal from prosecution---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife---Challan was submitted and charge was framed, however, the accused denied the allegation by claiming trial---Prosecution examined six witnesses when in the meanwhile, prosecutor submitted an application under S.494, Cr.P.C, for withdrawal from prosecution mainly on the ground that there was no probability of conviction of the accused in the case---Trial Court allowed the application and acquitted the accused---Validity---Record would show that that prior to the filing of subject application, the prosecution had already examined six prosecution witnesses before the Trial Court including the complainant, father of deceased and mother of deceased---All those were cross-examined by the defence at length---Both the said witnesses admitted that they were not eye-witnesses to the occurrence---More-so, it also appeared that the complainant and his wife had nominated the respondent/ accused for the alleged offence after a delay of 14 days, regarding which, no plausible explanation had been offered by the prosecution---Regarding the alleged motive, no reliance and convincing evidence was brought on record---In addition to that the Medical Officer categorically stated that no signs of injury were found on the body of the deceased, thus, in such circumstances, the nature of death of the deceased as to whether it was a case of homicide or suicide was still a mystery---Trial Court had noted that if the remaining prosecution evidence was recorded even then there would still be no likelihood of conviction of the accused and as such it would be a futile exercise---Trial Court had not only considered the application submitted by the prosecution but had also given due weight to the evidence available on record---Findings recorded in the impugned judgment by the Trial Court were based on the provisions of S.265-K, Cr.P.C., which empowered the Court to acquit an accused at any stage of the proceedings if it was of the opinion that even if the remaining evidence was brought on record, the result still would be acquittal---Such power might also be exercised suo motu by the Trial Court in appropriate circumstances without application by the accused---Thus, in the circumstances of the case, proceeding further with the trial of the respondent/accused would be nothing but a futile exercise as well as the wastage of precious time of the Court---Even otherwise, it appeared from the impugned findings that the powers under S.265-K Cr.P.C. had been exercised by the Trial Court judicially because the accused had not merely been discharged but acquitted after framing of charge and recording necessary evidence, therefore, the impugned decision regarding the acquittal of the accused was in line with the principles of law under S.265-K, Cr.P.C., and the same had caused no miscarriage of justice---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Habib-ur-Rahman vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 152 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ