NAZEER KHAN Vs The STATE and another

Sindh high court

NAZEER KHAN—Petitioner


The STATE and another—Respondents

Criminal Petition No. 140-P of 2014, decided on 10th June, 2019.

(Against the judgment dated 15.10.2014 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Appeal No.207 of 2011)

Present: Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Sardar Tariq Masood and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)—

—-S. 302—Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.46—Qatl-i-amd—Appreciation of evidence—Dying declaration, reliance on—Scope—Though the deceased was wounded critically, he was found by the medical officer to be well within the capacity to share details of the incident—Narrative of the deceased was straightforward and confidence inspiring besides being in harmony with the ocular account and medical evidence—Accused remained absent from law sans any justification—Given accused’s advance age, he had already been dealt with leniently in the matter of his sentence—Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused.

M. Amjad Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.

Anis M. Shahzad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Date of hearing: 10th June, 2019.


QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.—In the wake of absconsion, commencing from January 1992, Nazeer Khan, petitioner, accused in a case of homicide, was finally tried by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Kohat, in the year 2011; he stood convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 15.3.2011, upheld by a learned Division Bench of the Peshawar High Court vide impugned judgment dated 15.10.2014.

On the fateful day i.e. 22.1.1992 at about 1.30 p.m., over a dispute of land, the petitioner shot Nisar Muhammad, whereas his brother, Jan Muhammad, targeted Ghaffar Gul, PW; the former succumbed to the injuries leaving behind his last declaration pointed upon petitioner’s culpability; his brother though exonerated from being in the community of intention, nonetheless, was held guilty for murderous assault; he was convicted and sentenced without challenge. Upon petitioner’s arrest, the same prosecution evidence has been pressed into service to drive home the charge.

2. Though wounded critically, the last declarant was found by the medical officer well within capacity to share details of the incident, a narrative found by us as straightforward and confidence inspiring besides being in harmony with ocular account and medical evidence. Petitioner’s absence from law sans any justification. Given petitioner’s advance age, he has already been dealt with leniently. Impugned judgment being well within the remit of law as well as facts applicable thereto does not call for interference. Petition is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.

MWA/N-8/SC Petition dismissed.

Leave a Reply