Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 YLR 451
Court / Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court
Year of Decision: 2022
Decision Date: 2022-12-31
Parties: The State and others vs Ejaz Ahmed and others
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Lahore High Court on 2022-12-31, officially reported as 2025 YLR 451. In this matter between The State and others and Ejaz Ahmed and others, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2025 YLR 451
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, Muhammad Tariq Nadeem Title: The State and others vs Ejaz Ahmed and others Case No.:Murder Reference No.22 of 2019, Criminal Appeal No. 788-J of 2019, Criminal
JUDGMENT
Reported As: 2023 LHC 7446, 2025 YLR 451 Result: Appeal Dismissed Judgment JUDGMENT SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, J. -Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain (convict) was tried alongwith Muhammad Khan, Shabbir Ahmad, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Azeem, Mujahid Hussain, Mudassar and Faraz (since acquitted), the co-accused of the convict by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan in case F.I.R No. 97 of 2015 dated 20.03.2015 registered in respect of offences under sections 302, 148,149 and 114 P.P.C. at the Police Station Budhla Sant, District Multan for committing the Qatl-i-Amd of Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim (deceased) and Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam (deceased) ( The F.I.R was initially registered in respect of offence made punishable under section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act,1997 also however the said offence was deleted and the accused were not charged for the said offence.) . The learned trial court vide judgment dated 11.02.2019, convicted Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain (convict) and sentenced him as infra: Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain : Death on two counts under section 302(b) P.P.C. as Tazir for committing Qatl-i-Amd of Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim (deceased) and Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam (deceased) and directed to pay Rs.200,000/- as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. to the legal heirs of each deceased and in case of default whereof the convict was directed to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months. The convict was ordered to be hanged by his neck till dead. Muhammad Khan, Shabbir Ahmad, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Azeem, Mujahid Hussain, Mudassar and Faraz, the co-accused of the convict, were however acquitted by the learned trial
---
## Page 2
court. 2. Feeling aggrieved, Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain (convict) lodged Criminal Appeal No.788-J of 2019 assailing his conviction and sentence. The learned trial court submitted Murder Reference No.22 of 2019 under section 374 Cr.P.C. seeking confirmation or otherwise of the sentence of death awarded to the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain. The complainant of the case namely Abdul Razzaq filed Criminal Appeal No.588 of 2019 against the acquittal of the accused namely Muhammad Khan ,Shabbir Ahmad, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Azeem, Mujahid Hussain, Mudassar and Faraz by the learned trial court. We intend to decide the Criminal Appeal No. 788-J of 2019, the Criminal Appeal No.588 of 2019 and Murder Reference No.22 of 2019 through this single judgment. 3. Precisely, the necessary facts of the prosecution case, as stated by Abdul Razzaq (PW-1), the eye witness of the case, are as under:- "Stated that on 20.03.2015, 1 alongwith my sons Saif ur Rehman, Muhammad rizwan, while riding on motor cycle, My brother Muhammad Asghar S/o Muhammad Ibrahim, Muhammad Asghar s/o Muhammad Aslam, riding on other motor cycle bearing registration No.MNP-2919 going ahead of us were returning after saying Jumma Prayer, when we reached near godown of wheat, where 08 persons were already standing they were Muhammad Khan, Shabbir, Iqbal, Faraz, Mudassar, Azeem, Ijaz and Mujahid s/o Shabbir, accused persons, all present in the court. Shabbir and Muhammad Khan raised lalkara that the complainant party should not go from there safely, Ijaz was armed with Kalashnikov while Mujahid was armed with 30 bore pistol. Both the said accused persons fired burst on the back side of Muhammad Asghar S/o Muhammad Aslam, who was sitting on rear seat of the motor cycle. Due to which he sustained injuries and fell down on the ground. The said both accused persons fired on him which ruptured his brain. My brother Muhammad Asghar S/o Muhammad Ibrahim in order to save his life did speed up the motor cycle. While accused persons Iqbal, Faraz, Azeem and Mudassar all armed with Kalashnikov chased my brother who was riding on motor cycle. During the said course the said accused persons kept on continuous firing) After a short distance Muhammad Iqbal accused made a burst on the person of my brother Asgher due to which he sustained injuries and fell on the ground. Accused Faraz while going near to my fallen brother made a burst on his head due to which his brain was ruptured, where after accused Azeem and Mudasar inflicted fire arms injuries on different parts of the body of my brother. Later on, all the accused persons raised alarm if anyone would come near the dead bodies he will be done to death. Thereafter the accused persons took out wallet of my deceased brother, the said wallet was containing 20 thousand rupees, I.D card and driving license alongwith other necessary documents. We did not go near them due to fear/terror caused by the said accused persons. This occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Rizwan S/o Abdul Razaq and Saif ur Rehman S/o Fazal Mehmood besides me. The accused persons had already committed near about 13 other murders. Muhammad Khan and Shabbir had used to give shelter to Ijaz previously and had also provided him weapons, while had committed murder of Muhammad Afzal S/o Fazal Mehmmod for which occurrence FIR No.324/15 P.S Budhla Sant was registered.The deceased Muhammad Asghar S/o Muhammad Aslam was the eye witness of said occurrence and my said brother used to support complainant party of said case. That was the grudge of this occurrence. They wanted to get finished the support of my brother towards complainant of the above said occurrence so they committed the murder of my brother. I presented application Ex.P.A, the accused persons be punished in accordance with law." 4. After the formal investigation of the case report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was submitted before the learned trial court and the accused were sent to face trial. The learned trial court framed the charge against the accused on 04.01.2017, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
---
## Page 3
5. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, got statements of as many as seventeen witnesses recorded. The ocular account of the case was furnished by Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) . Riaz Ali 1774/HC (PW4) stated that on 02.06.2015, he was posted as Moharrir of the Police Station and at that time, the parcels said to contain empty shells of the bullets and blood stained earth recovered from the place of occurrence were already present in the Malkhana of the Police Station and on 11.09.2015 Bashir Ahmad, SI (PW-15) handed over to him a sealed parcel said to contain a rifle and on 30.09.2015, he handed over the said sealed parcel said to contain a rifle to Bashir Ahmad, SI (PW-15) for its onward transmission to the office of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore. Abdul Rasheed 285/C (PW-5) stated that on 20.03.2015 he escorted the dead body of the deceased namely Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam to the hospital and received the last worn clothes of the deceased from the Medical Officer after the post mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased . Amjad Ali 1452/C (PW-7) stated that on 20.03.2015 he escorted the dead body of the deceased namely Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim to the hospital and received the last worn clothes of the deceased from the Medical Officer after the post mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased. Zia Ullah 2432/HC (PW-8) stated that on 20.03.2015, he recorded the formal F.I.R (Exh.PA/1). Muhammad Akram (PW-9) stated that after the occurrence, the Investigating Officer of the case collected empty shells of the bullets, the motorcycle (P-10) and the blood stained earth from the place of occurrence. Muhammad Anwar, ASI (PW-10) and Abdul Sattar 1667/HC (PW-11) stated that on 12.08.2015, the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed was arrested and the Kalashnikov rifle (P-11) was recovered from his possession. Muhammad Furqan (PW-12) stated that he identified the dead bodies of both the deceased at the time of their post mortem examinations and the Medical Officer handed over the last worn clothes of both the deceased to the Investigating Officer of the case in his presence. Irfan Hayat, draftsman (PW-13) prepared the scaled site plan of the place of occurrence (Exh.PN). Muhammad Akram (PW-14) stated that on 20.03.2015, he identified the dead body of the deceased. Jehanzeb Hayat 3380/HC (PW-17) produced the copies of Rapt No.17 (Exh.PS), Rapt No.11 (Exh.PT) and F.I.R No. 556 of 2015 (Exh.PU). Imran Arif, Inspector (PW-16), the Investigating Officer of the case, investigated the case from 20.03.2015 till 24.06.2015 and detailed the facts of the investigation as conducted by him in his statement before the learned trial court. Bashir Ahmad, SI (PW-15), the Investigating Officer of the case, investigated the case from 07.07.2015 till 30.09.2015, arrested the appellant Ejaz Ahmed on 31.08.2015 and detailed the facts of the investigation as conducted by him in his statement before the learned trial court. 6. The prosecution also got Dr. Liaquat Ali Ansari (PW-6) examined, who on 20.03.2015 was posted as Medical Officer at RHC, Makhdoom Rasheed and on the same day conducted the post mortem examination of the dead body of Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim on the same day. Dr. Liaquat Ali Ansari (PW-6) after conducting the post mortem examination of the dead body of Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim (deceased) observed as under:- "INJURIES 1) Multiple lacerated wound (entry wound) with inverted margin, abraded collar on right side of cheek, right eye. Due to blastic affected the skull bone fractured into multiple pieces and muscles, bones and brain matter spilled out, eyes absent. Face left side absent only musculature with right side of mandible right ear, nose musculature and some parts of occipital area present. Beared on right side of face present. 2) Multiple lacerated entry wound in area about 12 cm x 6 cm on the back of left upper arm and multiple lacerated wound having % x % cm in measurement and inverted margin. Multiple lacerated wound 1 x 1 cm on antero-lateral aspect in an area of 11 cm x 8 cm with everted margins (exit wound of the same injury). Bullets in its passage broken the humerus bones into multiple pieces and damaged the fascia muscles and blood vessels.
---
## Page 4
3) A lacerated wound % x % cm 4 cm medial to left armpit with inverted margins (entry wound). 4) A lacerated wound 2 cm x 1 cm on top of left shoulder joint with everted margins (exit wound). 5) A lacerated wound 1 cm x % cm (entry wound) with inverted margin present, lateral side of left chest 5 cm below the armpit. 6) A lacerated wound 3 cm x 1 cm on back of the chest 4 cm below the injury No.4 at the level of left scapular area with everted margins. This was the exit wound of injury No.5. During the passage of bullet, damaged the left lung vigorously and came out by fracturing the left scapula. 7) A lacerated wound % x % cm with inverted margins (entry wound) 10 cm above and lateral to right nipple. 8) A lacerated wound 2 cm x 1 cm on back of leftchest 5 cm lateral to midline, the wound has everted margins (exit wound of injury No.7). On dissection, the bullet injured in its path damaged the right lung crossed the midline damaged the 4th vertebrae and came out by fracturing the 4th rib. 9) A lacerated wound 1 cm x % cm on back of left thigh 12 cm above the poplitial fossa with inverted margins (entry wound). 10) A lacerated wound 3 cm x 2 cm on medial side of left thigh 16 cm from the left inguinal region with everted margins. this was the exit wound of injury No.9. The bullet in its path damaged the muscles and blood vessels but bone intact. ................ OPINION In my opinion, injury No.1 was the cause of death which was injury to brain vital organ associated with all other injuries which accelerate death. these injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of lift. All these injuries were ante mortem in nature and due to firearm. Probable time that elapsed between injuries and death instantaneously and between death and postmortem 6 to 7 hours." On the same day Dr. Liaquat Ali Ansari (PW-6) also conducted the post mortem examination of the dead body of Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam. Dr. Liaquat Ali Ansari (PW-6) after conducting the post mortem examination of the dead body of Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam (deceased) observed as under:- "INJURIES 1) multiple lacerated wound right side of face with inverted margin and tattooing present (entry wound) 2) Lacerated wound 3 cm x 4 cm and left eye ball with inverted margins tattooing present with absent left eye (entry wound). 3) A lacerated wound 3 x 4 cm on forehead going deep. 4) Lacerated wound 3 x 4 cm on right side of mandible with inverted margin (entry wound). All above injuries on dissection seen, the skull broken into multiple pieces, brain matters spille out, disfigured the face and left side of the skull open having broken skull pieces with brain matter coming out. There were 2 to 3 exit wounds on the occipital area. Left eye was absent. 5) % x % cm lacerated wound infront of neck at the level of throid cartilage, on dissection, bullet in its path damaged thyroid cartilage and blood vessel damaged the right lung and comes out on back of chest right side. 6) A lacerated wound 4 x 3 cm on left side of upper area of chest just below the lateral end of clavical with inverted margin (entry wound). On dissection, bullet in its path damaged the lung (left) vigorously and then comes out on back of chest at the level of 8th rib (fractured). 7) A lacerated wound 3 x 5 cm on back of left side of chest with everted margin (exit wound of injury No.6) 6 cm lateral-to-midline.
---
## Page 5
8) A lacerated wound 3 x 4 cm on medial end of the right clavicle with inverted margin on its path, the bullet damaged the clavicle (fractured) and then damaged the right lung vigorously and came out on the back of right chest at level of 5th rib. 9) Two lacerated wounds side by side on back of right chest 4 cm lateral to midline with everted margin (exit wound of injury No.58) 10) A lacerated wound 4 x 12 cm on dorsal and inner side on left foot having abraded collar. meta dorsal bones fractured. ............1 OPINION In my opinion, the cause of death was injuries No. 1 to 9 which were injury to vital organ, brain lungs. These injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of life. All the injuries were antemortem in nature and due to firearm. Probable time between injuries and death instantaneously and between death and postmortem was 8 to 9 hours. 7. On 22.11.2017, the learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor gave up the prosecution witnesses namely Saif ur Rehman,Ghulam Haider, Rana Muhammad Afzal and Mukhtiar as being won over by the accused and gave up the prosecution witnesses namely Asim Razzaq and Muhammad Shafique T/ASI as being unnecessary. On 13.03.2018, the learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor gave up the prosecution witness namely Muhammad Fayyaz 2039/C as being unnecessary. On 26.06.2018, the learned Assistant District Public Prosecutor gave up the prosecution witnesses namely Zulifqar Ali, Inspector, Muhammad Gulzar Inspector and Tahir Mahmood, SI as being unnecessary . On 08.01.2019, the learned Assistant District Public Prosecutor gave up the prosecution witnesses Mohsin Ali and Abdul Ghafoor as being unnecessary and closed the prosecution evidence after tendering the report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PV) regarding the analysis of the blood stained earth, the reports of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh. PW and Exh. PX), the judgment of learned trial court in case F.I.R 324 of 2014 (Exh.PY), warrants of arrest (Exh. PZ) of the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed and proclamation (Exh.PZ/1). 8. The learned trial court also recorded the statements of Tahir Masood, SI (CW-1) as a court witness who investigated the case from 01.06.2016 till 28.06.02016 and detailed the facts of the investigation as conducted by him in his statement before the learned trial court. 9. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the learned trial court examined the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain under section 342 Cr.P.C. and in answer to the question why this case against you and why the PWs have deposed against you, he replied that he had been involved in the case falsely and was innocent. The appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed son of Nazar Hussain opted not to get himself examined under section 340(2) Cr.P.C. and did not adduce any evidence in his defence. 10. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan convicted and sentenced the appellant as referred to above. 11. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the whole case is fabricated and false. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution remained unable to prove the facts in issue and did not produce any unimpeachable, admissible and relevant evidence to prove the same. The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the statements of the eye witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) were not worthy of any reliance. The learned counsel for the appellant also argued that the recovery of the Kalashnikov rifle (P-11) from the possession of the appellant could not be proved. The learned counsel for the appellant finally submitted that the prosecution had totally failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond the shadow of doubt.
---
## Page 6
12. On the other hand, the learned Additional Prosecutor General along with the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the prosecution had proved its case beyond shadow of doubt by producing independent witnesses. The learned Additional Prosecutor General along with the learned counsel for the complainant further argued that the deceased died as a result of injuries suffered at the hands of the appellant. The learned Additional Prosecutor General along with the learned counsel for the complainant further contended that the medical evidence also corroborated the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2). The learned Additional Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant contended that there was no occasion for the prosecution witnesses, who were related to the deceased, to substitute the real offenders with the innocent in this case. The learned Additional Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant prayed for the rejection of the appeal as lodged by the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed. The learned counsel for the complainant also argued that the Criminal Appeal No.588 of 2019, assailing the acquittal of Muhammad Khan, Shabbir Ahmad, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Azeem, Mujahid Hussain, Mudassar and Faraz by the learned trial court from the charges also merited acceptance. 13. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the complainant, the learned Additional Prosecutor General and with their assistance carefully perused the record and evidence recorded during the trial. 14. The instant case relates to the Qatl-i-Amd of two deceased namely Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim and Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Aslam.. A perusal of the prosecution evidence reveals that the whole prosecution case as against the appellant namely Ejaz Ahmed is based on the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2). The ocular account of the incident was narrated by the said prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) . The relationship of the said witnesses with the deceased namely Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim is on record. Ch. Muhammad Asghar son of Muhammad Ibrahim (deceased) was the brother of the prosecution witness namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and the paternal uncle of the prosecution witness namely Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) . The prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) were also admittedly not the residents of the place of occurrence. According to the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) , both of them had their residence at a distance of about as much as about 2 kilometres from the place of occurrence. The prosecution witness namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1), during cross-examination stated as under:- "Place of occurrence is situated at about a distance of 2 km from my house. ............... It is correct that the alleged occurrence took place in the area of 09-T Jahanian Road." The prosecution witness namely Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) during cross-examination stated as under:- My house is at the distance of 2 KM from the place of occurrence " In this manner, both the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) can be validly termed as "chance witnesses" and therefore were under a bounden duty to provide a convincing reason for their presence at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence and were also under a duty to prove their presence by producing some physical proof of the same. We have noted with grave concern that the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) failed miserably to provide any consistent evidence as to the reason for their arrival at the place of occurrence and their presence at the place of occurrence when the same was taking place. Being conscious of the fact that the occurrence had taken place on a road which was at a distance of about two kilometres from their residence, both
---
## Page 7
the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) stated that the reason for their arrival at the place of occurrence was that they had proceeded to the area of Badhla Sant to offer Juma prayers and when they were returning to their house from the Mosque situated within the area of Badhla Sant, that they happened to arrive at the place of occurrence and saw the assailants attack both the deceased who were at that time travelling on a separate motorcycle. A wade through the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) reveals that the reason given by them for having proceeded to the area of Badhla Sant to offer Juma prayers was sham. Both the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) admitted that there were several Mosques within the area of their residence where Juma prayers were also offered, however, could not explain their choice of not offering the Juma prayers in the said Mosques on the day of occurrence and proceeding to the area of Badhla Sant to offer Juma prayers, which Mosque was at a distance of as much as four kilometres from their house. The prosecution witness namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) , during cross-examination , admitted as under:- "I am resident of Chak No. 1-T Shumali. Volunteered that my residence is not in the Abadi of Chak. I am residing at my own land. Abadi of Chak No. 1-T is comprised of about 1500/2000 houses. Two mosques are situated in the said Chak. In both the mosques, Juma prayer is offered. The Chak 1- T Shumali situated at the distance of 1/1 1/2 Km from my residence. The Markazi Masjid Budla Santt where I went to say my Jumma prayer on the day of occurrence is situated at the distance of 4 Km from my residence." (emphasis supplied) The prosecution witness namely Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2), during cross-examination , admitted as under:- ".My house is situated in 1/T Shummali. Budhla Sant is situated towards North of our house about 4 Km away ------------- The Jumma prayers are offered in the mosques situated near our house" (emphasis supplied) In this manner, it is abundantly clear that the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) had no reason to had proceeded to the area of Badhla Sant to offer Juma prayers and the said reason was invented to provide justification for their subsequent arrival at the place of occurrence. It is also an admitted fact of the prosecution case that not even a single person joined the investigation of the case to verify the fact that prior to the occurrence, the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) had indeed offered Juma prayers in a Mosque situated within the area of Badhla Sant. As mentioned above, when there were as many as two Mosques present within the area of the residence of the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul Razzaq (PW-1) and Muhammad Rizwan (PW-2) where Juma prayers were being offered then there did not exist any reason for the prosecution witnesses namely Abdul…
Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.