IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Jail Petition No.317 of 2018 
(Against judgment dated 12.03.2018 passed by the 
Lahore 
High 
Court 
Lahore 
in 
Crl. 
Appeal 
No.1285/2013 along with M.R. No.260/2013)  
 
 
Fateh Sher 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State  
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Sarfraz Khan Gondal, ASC 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Ahmed Raza Gillani 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
Date of hearing: 
29.04.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- From amongst a large 
array of accused, prosecuted through a private complaint after 
complainant’s dissatisfaction with the investigative process, Fateh 
Sher, petitioner, alone was returned a guilty verdict in a case of 
homicide by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Pindi Bhatian; 
convicted under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 
1860 vide judgment dated 01.8.2013, he was sentenced to death, 
altered into imprisonment for life by the learned High Court vide 
impugned judgment dated 12.3.2018, vires whereof are being assailed 
on a variety of grounds, wholesale failure of prosecution case being 
most prominent.  
 
The incident is a night affair on fringe of the village Abadi when 
according to the complainant he accompanied the deceased and the 
injured at 10:45 p.m, without any apparent purpose. Besides the 
petitioner, his brothers Ikram Ullah and Ihsan Ullah, each lethally 
armed, alongside three unknown, confronted them with fire shots. Abid 
Hussain and Asghar Ali PWs were statedly attracted to the scene at 
Jail Petition No.317 of 2018 
2
that unearthly hour of the night to witness the occurrence, instigated 
by Javed co-accused. Through a supplementary statement purportedly 
recorded on 24.5.2010, unknown assailants were introduced by their 
names with specific roles. The co-accused were exonerated by the 
Investigating Officer and the complainant having found investigative 
conclusions inconsistent with the case set up in the crime report, 
preferred a private complaint which again resulted into failure barring 
the petitioner. Prosecution’s failure qua majority of the accused, one of 
whom is indivisibly assigned identical role, question of identity of the 
assailants in a moonlit night as mentioned in the crime report, an 
unanticipated encounter between the deceased and the injured with 
the assailants and inconsequential forensic report, makes out a case 
for reappraisal of evidence to ensure safe administration of criminal 
justice. Leave granted.   
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
29th April, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/- 
