PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

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

Case information

Citation
2026 SCMR 1010 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2026
Reporter
SCMR
Parties
IFTIKHAR AHMED alias Papu vs State
Subject matter
Criminal

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

Judgment text as reported

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---Medical evidence---Non-appearance of Medical Officer as witness---Inconsequential---Accused-appellants were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant and causing firearm injuries to the complainant---Medical Officer, who medically examined co-accused since acquitted and issued his Medico Legal Report, did not appear in the witness box but it was noteworthy that sustaining of injury by co-accused since acquitted had been admitted by the complainant himself in the contents of the FIR and the said fact was also admitted by prosecution witnesses---Likewise, the sustaining of injuries by appellant and co-accused since acquitted, had been admitted by the Investigating Officer---As the injuries on the bodies of the said members of the accused party were admitted by the prosecution witnesses, therefore, the admitted facts need not to be proved, hence non-appearance of the Medical Officer in the witness box was not fatal to the appellant''s case---Standard of proof required to establish a defence plea was lighter as compared to the prosecution because the prosecution had to prove its case beyond the shadow of any doubt, whereas the accused only had to create a reasonable doubt in the prosecution case through some attending circumstance(s) or some tangible evidence---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.

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English