MUHAMMAD IKRAM vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 598 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.

MUHAMMAD IKRAM VS STATE. Ss. 302(b), 324, 186, 353, 109, 148 & 149---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Murderous assault on police, acts of terrorism---Re-appraisal of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence. Alleged incident occurred in broad daylight near the Court premises and the matter was reported with reasonable promptness. Present petitioners were identified as the individuals responsible for the gun fires. Four eyewitnesses had provided the ocular account, consisting of two private witnesses and two police personnel. One of the private witnesses was the real brother of the deceased, he was present at the time of the incident while other private witness was a family friend of the complainant and the deceased individuals. Consequently, the presence of said witnesses at the time of the incident could not be questioned in any way. In the same vein, the ocular evidence provided by the eyewitnesses was also consistent with the testimony of police officials. It was not plausible that the complainant would falsely implicate or substitute the petitioners in the murder of his real siblings and allow the real culprits to escape without consequence. Ocular account provided by the said witnesses was fully substantiated by the medical evidence. Ocular account was also supported by the Forensic Science agency's affirmative report and the recovery of crime weapons from the possession of petitioners. Petitioners' guilt had been established to the hilt by both the Courts below, which had conducted an exhaustive analysis of the evidence on record. Upon its independent evaluation of the evidence, Supreme Court was unable to adopt a stance that differed from the concurrently held view of the Courts below. Prosecution proved its case against the petitioners (accused persons) beyond the shadow of doubt, however, due to mitigating circumstances, death sentence was converted to imprisonment for life. Petitions were converted into appeals and partly allowed.

MUHAMMAD IKRAM vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 598 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR