IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.93-P of 2015 
(Against the judgment dated 04.06.2015 passed by the Peshawar  
High Court Peshawar in Cr. A. No.657-P/2013) 
 
Mst. Rukhsana 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
 
  
Rehmanullah and another 
 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Abdul Fayaz Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Muhammad Ajmal Khan, AOR 
 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Muhammad Inaam Yousafzai,  
 
Addl. Advocate General, KPK 
 
Date of hearing: 
26.07.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Muhammad Islam, 
30/32 and Muhammad Said Ghani Shah, 25/26, were shot dead at 
4:30 p.m. on 2.2.2011 in the backdrop of a previous brawl within the 
precincts of Police Station Rustam, District Mardan; incident was 
reported by Muhammad Inaam PW 5:30 p.m. straight at the police 
station; respondent along with his brother Abid were arrayed as 
accused in the backdrop of a previous dispute over the fodder; latter is 
still away from law; a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Mardan 
convicted the respondent under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan 
Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to death on two counts with a 
direction to pay compensation vide judgment dated 13.12.2013, 
overturned by the High Court vide impugned judgment dated 4.6.2015, 
vires whereof, are being assailed on a variety of grounds. It is argued 
that the deceased, both in their prime youth, were brutally done to 
death in broad daylight under unmistakable premeditation within the 
view of witnesses who not only established their presence at the scene 
but also had no axe to grind against the culprits, one of whom is still 
avoiding justice; that each piece of evidence produced by the 
Criminal Petition No.93-P/2015  
2
prosecution is synchronized with the events within the proximity of time 
and space, hardly leaving a room to deliberate a false case or entertain 
any hypothesis of substitution. The bottom line is that ocular account 
and investigative conclusions squarely constituted “proof beyond doubt” 
and, thus, High Court’s disproportionate reliance on the peripheral 
issues purporting inconsequential omissions by the Investigating 
Officer, witnesses’ inability to point out caliber of weapons with 
exactitude and reference to entries in the site plan without their having 
been confronted to the witnesses presents adjudication, diametrically 
incompatible with the settled norms of appreciation of evidence in 
administration of criminal justice and, thus, being artificial tends to 
result in miscarriage of justice, clamouring for intervention by this 
Court. Contentions merit consideration; leave is granted to reappraise 
the entire evidence. Send for the respondent through bailable warrant 
in the sum of Rs.200,000/-, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this 
Court at Peshawar. Station House Officer shall execute the warrant 
within a fortnight.   
 
 
 
 
  
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Peshawar, the 
26th July, 2021 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/- 
