IFTIKHAR AHMED alias Papu vs State — 2026 SCMR 1010 SUPREME-COURT

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

IFTIKHAR AHMED alias Papu VS State. Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused-appellants were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant and causing firearm injuries to the complainant---Occurrence in this case admittedly took place in-front of the house of co-accused since acquitted---Claim of the accused party was that in-fact the complainant party was the aggressor, who came to the house of the accused party on the day of occurrence and caused injuries to four co-accused since acquitted---Same plea that the complainant party was the aggressor, was taken by the appellant and his co-accused in their statements recorded under Section 342, Cr.P.C, before the Trial Court---Two co-accused persons were assigned the roles of causing one firearm injury each on the back side of the chest and on the left shoulder of deceased, respectively, but the said accused were acquitted by the High Court vide the impugned judgment on the ground that recoveries of weapons at the pointing out of the said co-accused remained inconsequential---Although the conviction and sentence of the appellant had been upheld and maintained on the ground that the prosecution case against the appellant was corroborated by the recovery of 12-bore gun and positive report of Forensic Science Agency, but it was noteworthy that the empties were recovered from the spot on 23.08.2012---Appellant was arrested in this case on 28.08.2012 and the empties were deposited in the office of Forensic Science Agency on 28.08.2012 i.e., after the arrest of the appellant in this case---Under the circumstances, even the prosecution evidence qua the recovery of 12-bore gun and positive report of Forensic Science Agency, against appellant, was not safe to be relied upon---Recovery of weapon of offence and positive report of Forensic Science Agency were disbelieved when the empties were deposited in the office of Forensic Science Agency after the arrest of the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond the shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

IFTIKHAR AHMED alias Papu vs State — 2026 SCMR 1010 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR