GHULAM SARWAR GHANGRO vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 251 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.

GHULAM SARWAR GHANGRO VS STATE. S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Unseen occurrence---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Anomaly of time of death suggested that the prosecution witnesses were not present at the time of occurrence and the same appeared to be unseen occurrence---Prosecution witnesses were relatives of deceased and several contradictions had also been pointed out---Complainant/eye-witness and the other eye-witness stated in their examination-in-chief that the dead body of deceased was brought to Police Station on donkey cart where report was lodged and thereafter the police had given the letter to hospital for post mortem, however, the complainant during cross examination admitted that they took the dead body to hospital and they returned to Police Station after that---FIR also depicted that firstly the dead body was taken to hospital and then the complainant approached the Police Station to report the incident---Moreover, the eye-witnesses also made improvement regarding robbing of Rs.25,000/- from deceased during their examination-in-chief which was not reported in FIR---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal and was allowed accordingly, and petitioner was acquitted of the charges. S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Delay of 07-hours and 30-minutes in conducting postmortem examination upon the dead body of the deceased---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---As per prosecution version the occurrence took place on 15.10.2005 at 06:00 p.m. and the post-mortem was conducted on 16.10.2005 at 01:30 a.m. i.e. after 7-1/2 hours---As per report of Medical Officer, at the time of post mortem, rigor mortis was fully developed---Rigor mortis signified the post-mortem stiffening of both voluntary and involuntary muscles in the human body---Such process typically commenced within 2 to 4 hours after death and achieved full development within approximately 12 hours in a temperate climate---Similarly, the reverse process with which rigor mortis disappeared was called algor mortis---In sudden natural deaths occurring in a temperate climate during average seasonal conditions rigor mortis usually commenced within 2 to 4 hours of death, which reached to a peak in about 12 hours and started to disappear after another 12 hours---Admittedly, the deceased was young male of 26 years in a temperate climate area where the weather was comparatively hot even in early winters---Occurrence statedly took place at 06:00 p.m. and the post-mortem was conducted the next day at 01:30a.m. i.e. after 7-1/2 hours---Swift development of complete rigor mortis on the body of young adult deceased in the temperate region contradicted the time of occurrence deposed by the prosecution witnesses and development of rigor mortis within such short span of time was implausible which suggested that the occurrence did not appear to have taken place at the point of time mentioned by the witnesses---Determination of time was further clarified by deposition of Medical Officer who conducted post-mortem of deceased---Said Medical Officer admitted during the cross-examination that as per his report, the time duration between death and post mortem was sixteen to eighteen hours and by that calculation the death occurred on 15.10.2005 in between 7:30 a.m. to 09:30 a.m.---Said witness further admitted that according to the condition of dead body it was impossible that death occurred in between 05:00 p.m. to 07:00 p.m. as alleged by prosecution---Deposition of expert witness/Medical Officer also appeared to be in accord with the medical jurisprudence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal and was allowed accordingly, and petitioner was acquitted of the charges. S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Unnatural conduct of witnesses---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Conduct of the eye-witnesses as reflected in record was unnatural as the real son of complainant and real brother of the eye-witness was being murdered in front of their eyes and they neither resisted nor raised any hue and cry to rescue the deceased---Time durations as narrated by prosecution also did not add up harmoniously to support prosecution story---Distance between place of occurrence and police station was 32 kilometers and despite of the same there was a delay of 7-1/2 hours in conducting the post mortem---Said contradictions were also coupled with the fact that the crime weapon was not recovered and motive was not established---All these circumstances created reasonable doubt and the benefit of such doubt must be extended to the petitioner---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal and was allowed accordingly, and petitioner was acquitted of the charges.

GHULAM SARWAR GHANGRO vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 251 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR