MIR ZAMAN ALIAS MUHAMMAD ALAM vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 486 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.

MIR ZAMAN ALIAS MUHAMMAD ALAM VS STATE. Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Scope. The accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing and also causing firearm injuries to the complainant and a passerby. The case of the complainant was that on the fateful day, he, his brother and son came to attend proceedings of a criminal case, where their opponents i.e., appellants and one unknown culprit were also present. At about 10:20 a.m., when they left the Court and reached near "A" Motors, the appellant made indiscriminate firing at their back, due to which two bullets hit his deceased brother's right thigh, whereas he received a bullet on his right leg and a passerby also received a bullet injury on his right leg. The deceased brother of the complainant succumbed to the injuries due to excessive bleeding. The complainant further stated that earlier on 15.02.2018, a dispute had arisen between the parties due to which a criminal case was registered at the Police Station and the appellant and co-accused persons, having anguish of old animosity, launched an attack upon them. Despite lengthy cross-examination, the complainant remained firm and consistent with his examination-in-chief. His statement remained unshaken and appeared natural, confidence inspiring and truthful. The son of the complainant appeared as a witness. His statement was in line with the statement of the complainant and he reiterated the facts narrated by the complainant. The said witness was subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence, but nothing could be brought on record to shatter his testimony. He remained firm and consistent with his examination-in-chief and his statement remained unshaken. The presence of the said witnesses was found natural and there was no reason for them to falsely implicate the appellant. The defence failed to bring anything on record to establish false implication of the appellant or substitution of the real culprits. The injured witness testified that on 09.05.2018, he went to Faisal Bank along with his wife and while returning, firing suddenly started, due to which a bullet hit his left leg and he sustained injuries. He was shifted to the Civil Hospital. Later on, he came to know that a person had made firing due to some enmity, which resulted in death of a person. Although the injured witness did not identify the culprit, importantly, he did not deny the occurrence. His statement did not create any dent in the prosecution case; rather, it confirmed the occurrence. The presence of eye-witnesses was established and their testimonies remained unshaken. Their statements inspired confidence and were found truthful, particularly because the injuries sustained by the complainant and passerby established their presence at the place of occurrence. The medical evidence corroborated the ocular account regarding the nature, time and locale of injuries sustained by the deceased and injured witnesses. The circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

MIR ZAMAN ALIAS MUHAMMAD ALAM vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 486 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ