Saif-Ur-Rehman vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 686 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.

Saif-Ur-Rehman VS State Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Place of occurrence proved---Accused charged were for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---In the present case, the house of the complainant was situated near the place of incident and on the other, the complainant himself got injured in the transaction, so his presence in the hospital was neither disputed nor the same could be questioned---Investigating Officer collected blood from the respective places of the injured and the deceased and, he also collected an empty of 7.62 bore along with two (02) empties of .30 bore and two (02) live cartridges of the same bore from the place of incident, so no ambiguity was left that the incident occurred inside the Police-Post and that the complainant and deceased received injuries in the stated manner---Appeal to the extent of the appellant "SR" was partially allowed and instead he was convicted and sentenced under S.302(b), P.P.C to life imprisonment and the remaining portion of the judgment to his extent was left intact. Citation Name: 2026 YLR 686 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Saif-Ur-Rehman VS State Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Related witnesses, evidence of---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Complainant was the real brother of the deceased, but mere relationship of the complainant with the deceased would hardly be a circumstance for disbelieving his statement, that too, when he himself received injuries in the episode---Thus, the false involvement of the appellants for the tragic murder of the deceased could not be acceptable, as under no circumstances, a real brother would stigmatize his real sister for falsely implicating the appellants in the instant case---On one hand the complainant had the stamp of injuries, whereas on the other, the defense despite efforts could not shatter his testimony, so the incident occurred at the stated time and in the stated manner---Appeal to the extent of the appellant "SR" was partially allowed and instead he was convicted and sentenced under S.302(b) P.P.C to life imprisonment and the remaining portion of the judgment to his extent was left intact. Citation Name: 2026 YLR 686 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Saif-Ur-Rehman VS State Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Case of free fight---Dishonest improvements made by complainant---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Complainant assigned the role of firing to the appellant, "GH" and it was the complainant who disclosed that from the firing made by the appellant, he received firearm injuries---Interestingly, when the complainant was examined by the Medical Officer, no firearm injury was noted on his body and it was the medical evidence which was in conflict with the statement of the complainant qua the firearm injury caused to him---Said conflict between the two had travelled deep to the roots of the case qua involvement of appellant "GH" in the heated talk episode---Admittedly there was heated talk between the parties followed by a free fight, so it was during altercation that the parties lost their cool and as such the incident occurred---When admittedly there was a free fight between the parties, then this Court is to see the individual liability of every accused in the episode, as the introduction of a free fight had discarded the joint liability and the factum of common intention---In case of free fight, every individual is to be held responsible for the role he played and as no firearm injury was found on the body of the complainant, so the statement of complainant lost confidence on that particular aspect of the case qua involvement of the appellant "GH" in causing him a firearm injury---When such was the state of affairs, then the dishonest improvements made by the complainant by itself was sufficient for the acquittal of the appellant, "GH", from the charge levelled against him---Thus, the Court was inclined to hold that the prosecution failed to connect the appellant "GH" with the commission of the offence and that it failed to bring home guilt against that appellant---Appeal against conviction to the extent of appellant "GH" was allowed, in circumstances.

Saif-Ur-Rehman vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 686 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR