MUSHTAQ AHMED vs State Ss — 2026 SCMR 60 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.

MUSHTAQ AHMED VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Co-accused acquitted on same set of evidence---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the deceased---Record revealed that the Trial Court acquitted the three co-accused, against which, acquittal appeals were filed against two only but subsequently the said appeals were withdrawn, whereas no appeal was filed against the acquittal of third accused---Police had declared two of the accused as innocent which aspect had also been endorsed by the Trial Court and subsequently affirmed by the High Court since appeals against their acquittal were dismissed by the High Court as withdrawn---Said aspect clearly led to the conclusion that on the given set of facts/evidence, benefit of doubt had been given by the Courts below to co-accused, who were allegedly carrying a gun and pistol respectively, so there was no reason why the said benefit of doubt could not be extended to the present petitioner---Under the given set of facts/evidence, the benefit of doubt ought to be given to the present petitioner as well---Since the prosecution evidence had already been disbelieved against co-accused, therefore, it would not be prudent and justified to rely on such evidence qua the case of the present petitioner i.e. it would be unsafe to rely upon such evidence alone for convicting the present petitioner, without independent corroboration, which was lacking in the present case---Petition was converted into appeal and allowed, in circumstances and accused was acquitted from the charge. Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of ten hours in conducting the postmortem upon the dead body of the deceased---Consequential---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the deceased---Deposition of Medical Officer revealed that there was a delay about ten hours in conducting the postmortem examination after receiving the dead body of deceased---Medical Officer explained that it was not his fault since the police papers were not made available to him by the police, hence the postmortem could not be conducted in a timely manner---Record also revealed that there was a delay of almost twenty three hours in conducting the postmortem from the time of the death of deceased---Delay in conducting postmortem could be considered as a factor which created doubt in the prosecution case, thus it suggested that the occurrence was unseen and the said delay was consumed in procuring the attendance of false eye-witnesses---Unexplained delay in conducting the postmortem examination caused damage to the prosecution's case---Petition was converted into appeal and allowed, in circumstances and accused was acquitted from the charge. Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Presence of the eyewitnesses at the time and place of occurrence not proved---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the deceased---Deposition of the complainant revealed that since the police declared three accused persons innocent, he filed a private complainant against those persons, which was subsequently dismissed to their extent---Moreover, one "M" was named in the private complaint filed by complainant but was never produced as a witness in the instant case---Strangely enough, no muhallah residents had been arrayed as witnesses and all the witnesses were relatives of the complainant---Moreover, no document with regard to the dispute concerning any financial matter had been furnished by complainant so as to justify that there was, apart from the fact that the deceased had married the daughter of the accused, difference between the parties with regard to any financial aspect---Similar type of statement was given by the brother of the complainant, who also stated that he simply recorded a cursory statement before the Court and stated nothing about recovery of blood stained cotton, one empty from the spot, as well as, the recovery of blood stained Kassi, 12-bore gun and two live bullets from the house of the petitioner---Said witness also admitted that he did not try to catch hold of petitioner, while he was inflicting hatchet blows upon the deceased---Said witness also admitted that he did not try to save his brother by rushing him to the hospital and instead he merely stood by during the occurrence and remained silent---It was evident that the conduct of the prosecution eye-witnesses who were closely related to the deceased was highly un-natural which showed that actually they were not present at the spot at the relevant time---Other eyewitness also admitted that though there was hue and cry raised by the complainant but no muhallah residents were attracted to the spot after the occurrence---Petition was converted into appeal and allowed, in circumstances and accused was acquitted from the charge. Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statement of witnesses---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of the deceased---Record revealed a major contradiction in statement of the witnesses as according to some there were financial dispute between the deceased and the petitioner, whereas some said that there was a grudge between deceased and petitioner on the ground that deceased had married petitioner's daughter against his wishes---Petition was converted into appeal and allowed, in circumstances and accused was acquitted from the charge.

MUSHTAQ AHMED vs State Ss — 2026 SCMR 60 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR