MUHAMMAD ZAHIR vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 344 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

MUHAMMAD ZAHIR VS STATE. S. 302(b)---Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account proved---Scope. The accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant. The complainant narrated the whole story regarding the occurrence and correctly stated the time, date and manner in which the occurrence had taken place. The complainant had correctly identified the appellant before the Trial Court. Likewise, the other two witnesses were also eye-witnesses of the occurrence and they attributed the role of firing to the appellant. The said witnesses gave a consistent, natural and straightforward ocular account of the occurrence. The defence subjected them to lengthy and searching cross-examination, but their testimonies remained unshaken and unshattered. The said witnesses remained consistent on each and every material point and made their depositions according to the circumstances which surfaced in the case. Therefore, it could safely be concluded that their testimonies were reliable, straightforward and confidence-inspiring. The prosecution witnesses were natural witnesses who were residents of the locality and were supposed to be present at the place of occurrence. The presence of the complainant was also established at the spot due to the fact that he lodged the FIR promptly and shifted the deceased to the Civil Hospital. His name was also reflected in the Medico-Legal Certificate wherein it was clearly mentioned that the deceased was brought to the hospital by the complainant. The presence of eye-witnesses was further established on the basis of their statements recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C., which were promptly recorded by the Investigation Officer. All the witnesses gave consistent and straightforward ocular accounts of the occurrence. Despite exhaustive and lengthy cross-examination, nothing was brought on record which could demonstrate the falsity of the witnesses' account or create doubt regarding their presence at the scene of crime. The medical evidence was in complete harmony with the ocular testimony of the complainant and both other eye-witnesses. No conflict could be pointed out which could create any dent in the prosecution case. The circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. However, due to mitigating circumstances, the sentence of death awarded to the appellant was altered to imprisonment for life. Appeal against conviction was dismissed with said modification in sentence.

MUHAMMAD ZAHIR vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 344 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ