AJDAR vs RAZIMAND Ss — 2026 YLR 254 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.

AJDAR VS RAZIMAND Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions and improvements made by witnesses in their statements---Accused-respondents were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant---In the initial report, no motive was advanced by the complainant qua the murder of his deceased brother---On 23.10.2013 i.e. after four days of the occurrence when the complainant-party recorded their statements under S.164, Cr.P.C, they charged the accused/respondents for the murder of the deceased, by citing a specific motive which was disclosed to be that his deceased brother had suspicion in his mind that his sister-in-law had developed illicit relations with the accused/respondent---Complainant, in his examination-in-chief, stated that he almost reiterated the same facts as advanced in his initial report followed by his statement recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C.---No doubt, in initial report of complainant, in the form of 'Murasila' followed by the FIR nobody was charged by the appellant/complainant for committing the murder of his brother, however, in his statement recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C, complainant implicated the accused-respondents---In his cross-examination, complainant not only resiled from his statement recorded before the police but he also negated his statement recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C in terms that he had not stated therein that accused had developed illicit relations with his sister-in-law---Complainant also contradicted the alleged telephonic contacts made between the accused and said lady---Complainant also stated that when he reached to the spot, his deceased brother was lying on the ground and at the venue of crime there were around 200/300 persons---Very initial report of the appellant/complainant followed by his statement recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C, as well as his testimony before the Court were full of contradictions and improvements which cut the very roots of the prosecution's case---Same was the case with the statement of eye-witness---Testimony of said witness too was also of no use for the prosecution qua the guilt or otherwise of the accused/respondents---Both the said witnesses had not been able to specify the role of each and every accused in the commission of the alleged offence, as it was not appealable to a prudent mind that how the complainant-party or for that matter the alleged witnesses of the occurrence identified and specified the accused/respondents, for their alleged role of firing at the deceased, amongst the set of five accused who were allegedly boarded in the motorcar, therefore, the very story advanced by the prosecution was not appealable---Even if the accounts of these material witnesses were put in juxtaposition with their improvements, then the same made the case of prosecution a case of no evidence---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed, in circumstances.

AJDAR vs RAZIMAND Ss — 2026 YLR 254 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR