IMRAN vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 47 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.

IMRAN VS STATE. Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd---Common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Medical evidence---Joint role of causing firearm injuries---Benefit of doubt. Petitioner-accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the brother of complainant. Record showed that a joint role of making fire shots was assigned to petitioner and co-accused. No specific injury on the body of the deceased was attributed to the petitioner. As per postmortem report, there were eight (08) entry and eight (08) exit wounds on the body of the deceased and all the entry wounds on the body of the deceased were of the same size i.e., 1/4 x 1/4 inches. The medical evidence showed that one firearm was used in the occurrence and the injuries on the body of the deceased were attributable to one weapon. Since no specific injury was attributed to the petitioner and only a joint role of causing firearm injuries was assigned to him and the co-accused, it was not determinable as to whether the injuries on the body of the deceased were caused by the petitioner or the co-accused. Such circumstances created a serious doubt in the prosecution case. Held: Medical evidence is only supportive in nature and may confirm the nature of injuries, kind of weapon used and manner of occurrence, but it cannot by itself identify the assailant. Where no specific injury is attributed to an accused and the role assigned is joint with another accused, the benefit of doubt must be extended to such accused. Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the petitioner beyond the shadow of doubt. Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

IMRAN vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 47 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR