IFTIKHAR AHMAD vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 674 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.

IFTIKHAR AHMAD VS STATE. Ss.302(b), 427, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, causing damage or loss of fifty rupees or more through mischief, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---No justification for the presence of witnesses at the time and place of occurrence---Chance witnesses, evidence of---Scope---Accused-petitioner was charged that he along with his co-accused persons committed murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Occurrence took place near the graveyard of village "MB", whereas the prosecution eye-witnesses, complainant and an eye-witness, both were residents of village "MJ"---Said eye-witnesses were not residents of the village where the occurrence took place, therefore, they were bound to prove the reason of their presence at the relevant time at the spot, which was situated in a different village---In order to justify the presence of witnesses at the spot at the relevant time, it was stated by the eye-witnesses that they came to village "MB" to offer funeral prayer of one "FK" and the occurrence took place near the graveyard immediately after the funeral prayer but no resident of village "MB" was produced in the witness box to support the claim of the eye-witnesses that they participated in the funeral prayer of "FK" and were present in his village at the time of occurrence---Claim of the prosecution that the eye-witnesses were present in village "MB" to offer funeral prayer of one "FK" showed that complainant party had close ties with the family of said "FK" but even no member of the family of "FK" was produced in the witness box to support the prosecution case---As the prosecution eye-witnesses were chance witnesses and they could not prove the reason of their presence in a different village at the time of occurrence through any cogent evidence, therefore, they were chance witnesses and their evidence was not free from doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed.

IFTIKHAR AHMAD vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 674 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR