PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

KASHIF NOUMAN ALIAS KASHI vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 864 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2026 YLR 864 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
YLR
Parties
KASHIF NOUMAN ALIAS KASHI vs STATE Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 103---Q; S. 103; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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

Judgment text as reported

KASHIF NOUMAN ALIAS KASHI VS STATE Ss. 302(b) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of weapon of offence---Non-association of private witnesses---Effect---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant---Record showed that a pillow was recovered from the appellant, however the same could not be relied upon as the Investigating Officer of the case did not join any witness of the locality during the recovery of the pillow from the appellant which was in clear violation of S.103 Cr.P.C---Provisions of S.103 Cr.P.C, unfortunately, were honoured more in disuse than compliance---Therefore, the evidence of the recovery of pillow from the appellant could not be used as incriminating evidence against the appellant, being evidence that was obtained through illegal means and hence hit by the exclusionary rule of evidence---Furthermore, it was admitted part of the prosecution case that the Investigating Officer of the case on 07.12.2019 had visited the house from where the pillow was recovered and remained there for a substantial period of time and in that scenario, had the pillow been present in the same house, then its presence must have been noted by the Investigating Officer of the case however it was not---Most important fact relating to the recovery of pillow was that the Investigating Officer of the case admitted during cross-examination that the said pillow was recovered from the house which was in the possession of the complainant and his family---Said pillow was recovered after about five months of the occurrence---All these facts denuded the effort made by the Investigating Officer of the case to prop up the failing prosecution case by showing sham recovery of the pillow---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English