Muhammad Arshad vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 410 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 Arshad VS State Ss. 302(b), 364, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping and abducting a person in order to murder, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant after kidnapping him---Motive for commission of crime as asserted in the FIR was that there was enmity between complainant side and accused over amurder case---Complainant in his examination in chief, stated the motive that accused persons had enmity with them for the murder of "R"---In cross-examination, complainant provided certain details of the criminal cases against both the parties---According to complainant, he was implicated by the accused side in a criminal case for the offence under S. 324, P.P.C, through supplementary statement---Complainant, however, admitted it correct during cross-examination that no FIR was got registered by accused persons against his deceased son---Version of complainant during cross-examination was that the accused persons being inimical to him murdered his son---Accused persons did not have any specific motive against the deceased, rather their hostility was with the whole kinfolk of complainant---If it was believed that the accused persons had criminal rivalry with the complainant's clan, then prime target of the assailants should have been complainant and witnesses and not the deceased but strangely enough, the accused were shown to have targeted son of the complainant opting not to cause any sort of harm to complainant and witnesses---Motive set up by the complainant even if taken as gospel truth there was no explanation on the record as to why only deceased from the complainant's side was targeted by the accused when the complainant against whom they had grudge, was also available at the place of occurrence along with his real brother---It was also highly unlikely that accused persons would have spared the witnesses of ocular account for allowing them to become witnesses and depose against them for sending them to gallows---So, the conduct of accused persons during the occurrence ran counter to natural human conduct---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Arshad vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 410 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR