IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.83-P of 2015 
(Against the judgment dated 06.03.2015 passed by the Peshawar  
High Court Peshawar in Cr. A. No.188-M/2012) 
 
State through AG General KP, Peshawar 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
 
  
Sabz Ali Khan 
 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Ms. Abida Safdar,  
 
 
 
 
Assistant Advocate General, KPK 
 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s): N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
26.07.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Indicted for homicide 
for committing Qatl-i-Amd of Sher Muhammad, within the precincts of 
Police Station  Changlay, District Bonair, the respondent was convicted 
under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 by a 
learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 10.10.2012; he 
was sentenced to death with a direction to pay compensation to the 
legal heirs of the deceased; on the coordinate charge of murderous 
assault on Mushtaq PW, he was sentenced to 7-years RI with 
concomitant monetary compensation; the High Court acquitted him 
from the charges vide impugned judgment dated 06.03.2015, vires 
whereof, are being assailed on the grounds that there was no occasion 
for the High Court to take the impugned view inasmuch as the 
prosecution had successfully driven home charge beyond a shadow of 
doubt on the strength of ocular account furnished by the witnesses that 
included an injured with a massive injury. It is next argued that 
investigative conclusions drawn up pursuant to a prompt recourse to 
law, inexorably pointed towards respondent’s culpability, singularly 
arrayed in the crime report. According to the learned counsel, reference 
by the High Court to peripheral issues and stated durations of time are 
Criminal Petition No.  83-P/2015 
 
 
2
too 
trivial 
to 
override 
the 
preponderance 
of 
evidence 
that 
unambiguously excluded every hypothesis other than respondent’s 
guilt; similarly, according to her, stated lapses on part of the 
Investigating Officer, being inconsequential, certainly does not cast 
away prosecution’s case, otherwise firmly structured on evidence 
furnished by the independent witnesses and, thus, the impugned view 
being artificial warrants interference by the Court in order to avoid 
miscarriage of justice. Contentions merit consideration; leave is granted 
to reappraise entire evidence with a view to secure the ends of justice. 
Send for the respondent through bailable warrants in the sum of 
Rs.200,000/-, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at 
Peshawar. Station House Officer shall execute the warrants within a 
fortnight.  
 
 
 
  
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Peshawar, the 
26th July, 2021 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/- 
