PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

STATE vs AFTAB KHAN Ss — 2026 YLR 1345 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2026 YLR 1345 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
YLR
Parties
STATE vs AFTAB KHAN Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 417; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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

Judgment text as reported

STATE VS AFTAB KHAN Ss. 302(b), 114 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abettor present when the offense was committed, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account contradicting the medical evidence---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---As per narration of FIR, two accused/respondents had been assigned a general role of firing upon deceased brother of complainant---However, Forensic Science Laboratory Report was in total conflict with ocular-account, whereby it was mentioned that all the crime empties recovered from the spot were fired from one and the same pistol---Otherwise, when substantive evidence failed to connect an accused person with commission of an offence or was disbelieved, corroborative evidence was of no help to prosecution, as corroborative evidence could not by itself prove prosecution's case---Appeal being bereft of any merits stood dismissed in limine. Ss. 302(b), 114 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Qatl-i-amd, abettor present when the offense was committed, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Withholding best witness---Adverse presumption---Effect---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Record showed that the most relevant and important witness of the prosecution i.e., who was cited as an eye-witness of the occurrence in the FIR was not examined in Court as witness, therefore, an adverse inference under Art.129 (g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, could be inferred in terms that had this witness been produced in Court, he would not have supported the case of prosecution---Appeal being bereft of any merits was dismissed in limine. Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt is sufficient to extend its benefit to an accused person as it is the cardinal principle of criminal administration of justice that let hundred guilty persons be acquitted but one innocent person should not be convicted.

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English