Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 923 2026 SLD 923 = 2026 PCRLJ 201
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 77330, Murder Reference No. 221 and Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 81562 of 2021, decided on 29th April, 2025.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Tariq Nadeem and Raja Ghazanfar Ali Khan, JJ
Barrister Shehram Saqi, Muhammad Abid Hussain Saqi, Zahid Iqbal and Rana Shujja Farooq for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Asif Iqbal, Assistant District Public Prosecutor for the State. Kazim Ali Malik and Shamim-ur-Rehman Malik for the Complainant.

MUHAMMAD IRFAN alias Pomi---Appellant

VERSUS

The STATE and another---Respondents

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),148,149

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: V,103

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of eye-witnesses at the place and time of occurrence proved---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused persons committed murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Ocular account of the incident hinged upon the testimonies of complainant and an eye-witness, who happened to be the real brother and paternal cousin of deceased---Although both the said witnesses were closely related to the deceased, but their presence at the place of occurrence was quite natural and they had no animus towards the appellant---Complainant while appearing before the Trial Court reiterated the same facts as narrated in the FIR as well as private complaint and his statement had been fully corroborated by eye-witness---Both the eye-witnesses were residents of the same vicinity--Moreover, it was daylight occurrence, took place in that Mohallah, and the appellant was quite familiar to the eye-witnesses prior to the occurrence, therefore, there was no chance of misidentification of the appellant at the time when he was causing firearm injuries to the deceased---Complainant stated during his examination-in-chief that on the fateful day, he along with eyewitnesses were going behind deceased after offering Zohar prayer in "Masjid Aqsa", when deceased reached near his house, the said unfortunate occurrence took place---Similarly, eye-witness during his testimony had completely endorsed the evidence of complainant---In that way the presence of both the eye-witnesses at the time and place of occurrence was quite natural and probable---Said witnesses were cross-examined at length but nothing favourable to the appellant could be brought on the record--- Circumstances established that the prosecution proved its case beyond any shadow of doubt, however, due to some mitigating circumstances, death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---With said modification in sentence, appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 &…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register