Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2022 SCMR 888
Court / Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year of Decision: 2022
Decision Date: 2022-01-03
Parties: Rooh Ullah and others vs The State and others
This judicial decision was delivered by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on 2022-01-03. The matter involves proceedings between Rooh Ullah and others and The State and others, officially reported as 2022 SCMR 888. The court reviewed applicable Pakistani statutes, procedural requirements, and governing case-law authorities. The full text below contains the complete facts, arguments, and legal reasoning rendered by the honorable bench.
PLJ 2022 SC (Cr.C.) 159 Result: Dismissed Judgment ORDER QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Tarifullah, 55/60, and Muhammad Rawail, 20, were shot dead on 11.06.2007 at 5:00 p.m. within the precincts of Police Station Razakhel, District Nowshera, in the backdrop of an ongoing feud over a piece of property; Tariq Azam PW survived the assault to report the incident to the police at 7:25 p.m; the petitioners claimed trial before a learned Addl.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Amin-Ud-Din Khan, Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, Maqbool Baqar Title: Rooh Ullah and others vs The State and others Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 1316 of 2016 Date of Judgment:2022-01-03 Reported As: 2022 SCMR 888 Result: Petition dismissed
Judgment ORDER QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---Tarifullah, 55/60, and Muhammad Rawail, 20, were shot dead on 11.06.2007 at 5:00 p.m. within the precincts of Police Station Razakhel, District Nowshera, in the backdrop of an ongoing feud over a piece of property; Tariq Azam PW survived the assault to report the incident to the police at 7:25 p.m; the petitioners claimed trial before a learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Nowshera that culminated into their conviction both on the charges of homicide as well as murderous assault vide judgment dated 31.10.2013; they were sentenced to imprisonment for life as well as 5-years rigorous imprisonment, respectively; co-accused Shahid, arrayed through supplementary statement, was, however , acquitted from the charge, maintained by the High Court, vide impugned judgment dated 06.10.2016, vires whereof, are being assailed by the petitioners on the grounds that prosecution case, fraught with contradictions and doubts, merited outright rejection, in the face of an unproved motive. Prosecution's failure to effect recovery of weapon from Rooh Ullah petitioner yet another predicament faced by the prosecution, and, thus, evidence furnished by the injured PW was far from being the whole truth and, thus, was not worthy of implicit reliance, concluded the learned counsel. Contrarily , learned Law Officer assisted by learned counsel for complainant defended the impugned judgment. 2. Heard. Record perused. 3. We have gone through the statements of eye-witnesses that include an injured to find them in a comfortable unison both on the salient features of the case as well as matters collateral thereto. No doubt, injuries on the person of a witness are not a passport into the realm of truth, however , the learned counsel has not been able to point out even a single circumstance to suspect testimony of Azam Tariq PW. Incident, a daylight affair, was reported with a remarkable promptitude followed by examination of the injured as well as autopsy , circumstances that cumulatively exclude possibility of consultations or deliberations. Investigating Officer's failure to recover a weapon from Rooh Ullah does not overshadow the preponderance of prosecution evidence that includes recovery
---
## Page 2
from the principal accused. Bald denials alone do not override the prosecution evidence, rightly relied by the courts below . Petition fails. Leave refused.