FAISAL vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 428 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.

FAISAL VS STATE Ss. 324, 353, 337-F(iii) & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assaulting or using criminal force against a public servant in the execution of their duty, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account not supported by medical evidence---accused were charged that they made firing upon the police party, due to which the complainant/Police Constable got injured, whereas his companion escaped unhurt---Ocular account of the occurrence had been furnished by the complainant and his companion---Statements of the star witnesses of the prosecution clearly showed that they had contradicted each other on material points giving rise to doubt that either eye-witness was not present at the time of occurrence or the occurrence had not taken place in the mode and manner as narrated by the complainant in the Murasila---Thus, such inconsistent testimony was not worth reliance---Injured complainant was medically examined on 16,05.2019 at 10.45 pm by Medical Officer---Said Medical Officer appeared before the Court and stated in his cross-examination that the injured was discharged on 17.5.2019, however, the injured complainant stated in his cross examination that he remained hospitalized for six days and was discharged from hospital on 22.5.2019---Eye-witness sated in his cross-examination that the accused confronted them face to face---Similarly, complainant stated in his cross-examination that as per site plan and his statement, accused facing trial were in front of him---In view of his position at the time of occurrence, complainant should have sustained injury on front side of his body, but to the contrary, in the later part of his cross-examination, complainant stated that he sustained one bullet injury on the back side---Thus, the medical evidence too did not support the prosecution case---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

FAISAL vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 428 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR