Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 3426 2025 SLD 3426 = 2025 PCRLJ 963
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 83 and Criminal Revision Petition No. 13 of 2023, decided on 30th September, 2024.
Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Shaukat Ali Rakhshani, J
Syed ayaz Zahoor for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2023). Habibullah Khan Nasar for the Complainant (in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2023). Muhammad Younas Mengal, Additional Prosecutor General (

NAIMATULLAH and others---Appellants

VERSUS

The STATE and another---Respondents

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b)

(a)    Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of the complainant by firing---Complainant the sole eye-witness of the occurrence was maternal uncle of deceased, who accompanied him to the crime scene---According to complainant, accused alighted from a jeep, who was joined by his nephew, when suddenly they exchanged some hot words, whereupon the accused made firing with his pistol upon his nephew, which pierced his chest and he succumbed on the spot---Complainant was crossexamined at length by the defence, with regard to timing of arrival, Iftari, blood of deceased on his hands and clothes, taking the deceased to hospital and other aspects of the matter, but the defence could not shake his testimony--Complainant remained firm and consistent to his examination-in-chief, revealing the ocular account of the incident---Presence of complainant was denied on the crime scene by the defence, but it did not succeed in shaking his testimony---Deposition of complainant had been found to be natural and confidence inspiring, which went unshaken---Complainant was related to the deceased, but mere relation did not disqualify his testimony---Testimony of complainant had also been confirmed by the medical account furnished by Medical Officer, who testified that the dead body of deceased was brought by SI (police) and identified by complainant with history of firearm, whereof he issued Medico Legal Certificate---Defence had not disputed the unnatural death of the deceased---Forensic Science Laboratory Report had further cemented the unnatural death of the deceased by firearm, thus it could be concluded with no other view that the medical evidence confirmed the ocular account of complainant---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.G.M. Niaz v. the State 2018 SCMR 506 and Naseebullah v. The State 2022 YLR 885 rel.(b)    Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Motive proved--Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register