AMJAD vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 1205 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

AMJAD VS STATE Ss. 302(b), 364, 365, 201, 202, 149 & 109---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting a person with the intent to murder or to place them in danger of murder, kidnapping, causing disappearance of evidence of offence or giving false information to screen offender, intentional omission to give information about an offence by a person legally bound to inform, unlawful assembly, abetment---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of dead bodies on the pointation of accused---Non-association of private witnesses---Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant and his friend after their abduction---According to pointation memo prepared on 03.03.2017 in presence of brother of one of the deceased and complainant, the appellants alleged to have made pointation of the places where they had allegedly buried the dead bodies of both the deceased and in their presence the dead bodies had statedly been unearthed---No doubt both those witnesses recorded their statements under S.164, Cr.P.C, on 11.03.2017 i.e. on the 8th day of pointation memo but astonishingly witness, who was brother of deceased, could not be produced by the prosecution during trial so as to strengthen its case, meaning thereby that nomination of the said witnesses at the time of pointation by the appellants was nothing but just to fill in the blanks or at the instigation of complainant party because despite presence of number of independent witnesses none from the locality was associated with the pointation process---In absence whereof, pointation memo, containing unearthing of dead bodies of the deceased, lost its efficacy and no weight could be given to it under the law---Pointation memo was not of simple nature but containing dead bodies of both the deceased, thus, in such eventuality non-association of independent witnesses to such pointation memo badly affected the case of prosecution---Besides, associating father and brother of the deceased also raised finger towards another presumption that the police had already recovered the dead bodies of both the deceased but just to fabricate evidence in the case solely, based on circumstantial evidence, the appellants were shown to have pointed out the places of burial of both the deceased---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

AMJAD vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 1205 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR