Muhammad Ramzan vs State S — 2026 YLR 361 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Muhammad Ramzan VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Dying declaration---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the father of complainant by inflicting hatchet blows---Complainant mentioned in application that his deceased father told him that he was brought on pretext of compromise by appellant and then occurrence was committed and injury statement might be treated as "dying declaration"---When as per own case of prosecution, there was dispute between father of the complainant (now deceased of the case) and appellant, then there was no occasion for going of father of complainant (now deceased of the case) with appellant on his motorcycle and reason offered by the complainant in application for registration of the case that his father told him that he was taken by the appellant on the pretext of compromise did not seem plausible because if compromise was to be made, then it was appropriate to go to Board of Revenue, for recording the factum of compromise as case was pending there or to go to the village for compromise but no reason appealing to a common prudent man was brought on the record to show that for the purpose of compromise, (father of the complainant) went with appellant towards and at the place of occurrence---Therefore, this claim of the complainant appeared to be afterthought and fabricated just to give colour to the prosecution version, and was thus repelled---Circumstances established that prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, accordingly.

Muhammad Ramzan vs State S — 2026 YLR 361 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR