IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Petition No.258 of 2020 
(Against judgment dated 06.02.2020 passed by the 
Lahore High Court Lahore in Crl. Misc. No.4879-
B/2020)  
 
Muhammad Jahangir Afzal 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State through P.G. Punjab & another  
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Shamim-ur-Rehman Malik, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Ahmed Raza Gillani 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
with Abdul Ghani, SI 
 
For the Complainant: 
In person 
 
Date of hearing: 
28.04.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
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 
Criminal Petition No.258 of 2020 
2
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. 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
28th April, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/- 
