IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
Present:  
MR. JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL  
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED 
 
Criminal Petition No.30-P of 2014 
(Against the judgment dated 20.02.2014 passed by the 
Peshawar High Court Peshawar  in Cr. A. No.78-P/2013) 
 
State through A.G. KP, Peshawar 
 
…Petitioner  
Versus 
 
Amanat Khan, etc.  
..Respondent  
     
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Muhammad Nisar, Addl. A.G. KP 
 
For the Respondent(s): N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
06.7.2021 
 
ORDER  
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J-. In broad daylight, Javed 
Ali Shah, 40, was shot dead within the precincts of Police Station Lahore 
District Swabi; First Information Report was lodged by his uncle Syed 
Sardar Shah (PW-3) wherein he blamed the respondent, a previous convict, 
as the sole culprit, in the backdrop of a previous altercation. Autopsy 
conducted at 1:05 p.m. confirmed four entry wounds with corresponding 
exits. Respondent stayed away from the law and was finally spotted in a 
prison at Takhat Bhai wherefrom he was transposed as an accused in the 
present case; pursuant to a disclosure, he led to the recovery of a .30 
caliber pistol, however, incompatible with the casings secured from the 
spot. A learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 31.01.2013 
convicted him under clause (b) of Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 
1860 with the sentence of death alongside a direction to pay compensation, 
overturned by a Division Bench of Peshawar High Court Peshawar vide 
impugned judgment dated 20.02.2014, vires whereof, are being assailed on 
the grounds that in the face of overwhelming evidence furnished by natural 
witnesses having no axe to grind, there was no occasion for the High Court 
to acquit the respondent from the charge, squarely structured on ‘proof 
beyond doubt’. It is next argued that the impugned view of the High Court, 
seemingly based upon various circumstances, considered by it as suspect, 
mostly relate to peripheral or investigative flaws, with no bearing upon the 
Cr.P.30-P/2014 
2
preponderance of ocular account furnished by the witnesses who had 
satisfactorily explained their presence at the spot; they do not seem to have 
an axe to grind by substituting an innocent with the guilty. It is lastly 
argued that in the wake of respondent’s absconsion, a negative forensic 
report did not adversely effect the prosecution’s case nor non-mentioning of 
specific caliber of the weapon could destroy the intrinsic value of the 
testimony that successfully withstood the test of cross-examination, 
particularly having regard to the formidable past, hounding the respondent. 
Leave is granted to reappraise the entire evidence with a view to secure the 
ends of justice. Send for the respondent through bailable warrant of arrest 
in the sum of Rs.200,000/- with one surety in the like amount, returnable 
to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at Peshawar, to be executed through 
Station House Officer, within a fortnight.  
 
 
 
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
Peshawar,  
6th July, 2021 
Azmat/- 
‘Not approved for reporting’  
Cr.P.30-P/2014 
3
 
