Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 3776 = 2026 SLD 3776
Peshawar High Court
Cr.A No. 87-A/2025
Presented By: ABDUL FAYAZ JUDGE
Present: Mr. Yasir Mustafa Khan Swati, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Khan, Asst:A.G for the State. Mr. Muhammad Ali Qazi, Advocate for the complainant. Date of hearing: 02.03.2026

Khursheed… (Appellant)

VS

The State & 1 other… (Respondents)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860

Section: 324

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: 382-B

Case Summary Case: Khursheed v. The State & Naveed Ahmed (Criminal Appeal & Criminal Revision) Court: Peshawar High Court Judge: Abdul Fayaz, J. Decision Date: 02.03.2026 Tagline Imprisonment as Ta'zir in hurt offences cannot be awarded along with Arsh unless the conditions of Section 337-N(2) PPC are fulfilled; however, conviction may be maintained on reliable ocular and medical evidence. Facts The appellant stopped the complainant's car and: Fired multiple shots causing firearm injuries. Cut off the complainant's nose with a knife. Burnt the complainant's vehicle by pouring petrol. Motive alleged was a matrimonial dispute. Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 324, 336, 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), and 341 PPC and awarded imprisonment, Arsh, Daman, fine, and compensation. The appellant filed an appeal seeking acquittal. The complainant filed a revision seeking enhancement of sentence. Issues Whether the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt? Whether imprisonment (Ta'zir) in addition to Arsh/Daman was legally justified? Whether the sentence required modification? Held Conviction maintained. Appeal partly allowed only to the extent of reduction of sentence. Complainant's revision for enhancement dismissed. Court's Reasoning The injured complainant was a natural witness whose testimony remained consistent and trustworthy. Medical evidence fully corroborated the ocular account. Recovery of weapon, crime empties, blood-stained articles, and forensic evidence further strengthened the prosecution case. Minor discrepancies did not affect the prosecution's credibility. Failure to prove motive was not fatal, as the prosecution had otherwise proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. Considering: appellant's advanced age (65–70 years), heavy liability of Arsh, Daman, compensation and fine, and absence of previous convictions, the Court exercised leniency in sentence. ORDER; ABDUL FAYAZ, J.- My this order is directed to dispose of this Criminal Appeal bearing No. 87-A/2025 filed by the appellant/convict namely Khursheed as well as the connected Criminal Revision No. 37-A/2025 filed by the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register