2020 PLP 935 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR AFZAL — Petitioner Versus The STATE through P.G. Punjab and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 PLP 935 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Umar Ata Bandial and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR AFZAL — Petitioner Versus The STATE through P.G. Punjab and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 935 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 935 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Umar Ata Bandial and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 935 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR AFZAL — Petitioner Versus The STATE through P.G. Punjab and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shamim-ur-Rehman Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against judgment dated 06.02.2020 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. Misc. No. 4879-B of 2020)
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302(b)
Qatl-i-amd
Implication of accused on basis of supplementary statements of complainant and witnesses
Seemingly there was no consensus between the complainant and the injured witness on the identity of the accused
Even subsequently assigned role to the accused was not shared by the Investigating Officer who merely depicted his presence at the crime scene in a manner incompatible with witnesses' narrative
Evidentiary value of supplementary statements (of complainant and witnesses) with the possibility of reconciling differences between the witnesses was an exercise that could be best undertaken after recording of evidence and as such culpability of accused for now was squarely covered by S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.
Accused was granted bail in circumstances. Ahmed Raza Gillani, Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab with Abdul Ghani, SI for the State. Complainant in person.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Adnan Ahmed, 26, was shot dead at 8:30 p.m. on 22.8.2019 within the remit of Police Station Ferozwala, District Sheikhupura; Muhammad Tariq PW survived the assault; incident was reported by deceased's mother Talat Gulzar through written application wherein Rohail son of Gulzar accompanied by an unknown assailant was blamed for the assault without reference to motive for the crime; she inducted the petitioner as accused through supplementary statement purportedly recorded on 23.08.2019, in line with even dated statements of her brother Shafqat and daughter Sobia, acclaimed witnesses of the incident. Muhammad Tariq, injured PW, through statement dated 26.8.2019 took the petitioner on board as well, though in a manner, diametrically different. According to Muhammad Tariq PW, he alongside the deceased was surprised by the petitioner and Rohail co-accused, riding a motorbike, while they were present in the lane during load shedding; complainant as well as the witnesses named in the crime report are conspicuous by their absence; they are substituted by Tariq's sister Shamim Akhtar; retracting therefrom, he ditched the prosecution on 08.11.2019 by substituting the petitioner with an unknown assailant who accompanied the nominated co-accused.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Seemingly there is no consensus between the complainant and the injured on the identity of the petitioner; even subsequently assigned role to the petitioner is not shared by the Investigating Officer who merely depicted his presence at the crime scene in a manner incompatible with witnesses' narrative. Evidential value of supplementary statements with the possibility of a space to reconcile differences between the witnesses is an exercise that can be best undertaken after recording of evidence and as such petitioner's culpability for the present is squarely covered by subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898; a case for grant of bail stands made out. Criminal Petition is converted into appeal and allowed; petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/duty Judge. MWA/M-23/SC Bail allowed.