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 weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of complainant and witnesses---Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant after kidnapping him---Matter qua alleged abduction of complainant's son was not reported to police prior to 12.08.2014---Claimed by the complainant that on 12.08.2014, he received a clue that his son was confined in house of "HN", one of the accused, whereupon he along with witnesses reached the said place at Fajar time and saw that accused persons had overpowered his son and they were torturing him whereas one accused had strangulated abductee with a cloth---Entire case of prosecution was silent as to from where the complainant received information that his son was confined in the house of accused HN---Likewise, none of the accused was shown to have been armed with any kind of weapon when they were inflicting torture and ultimately murdered the deceased---No attempt whatsoever was shown to be made by the complainant or the witnesses, who undeniably were closely related to the deceased, to save the life of abductee by practically restricting assailants or to the least making any sort of earnest supplication to the accused persons---Strange to note that when complainant as per his own version was aware of the fact qua the abduction of his son by the accused persons with whom he had previous animosity and he came to know about the presence of his son at a certain place, why did he not report the matter to police to take Police Officials with him to rescue his son---This was aquestion that at one hand remained in mystery and on the other, reflected that the story qua witnessing of the occurrence in the result of which abductee was done to death, was an after-thought idea to show presence of complainant and witnesses at the spot---Whole conduct of the complainant and prosecution witnesses could conveniently be counted as pathetic one and same ran counter to the natural human conduct and behavior in the ordinary course of events---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