IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
Mr. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan 
 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.1316 of 2016 
(Against the judgment dated 06.10.2016 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court Peshawar in Crl. A. No.602-P/2013) 
 
 
Rooh Ullah, etc. 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State, etc.  
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Muhammad Ilyas Siddiqi, ASC 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Zahid Yousaf Qureshi,  
 
Addl. Advocate General, KP 
 
For the Respondent(s): 
Mr. Talat Mahmood Zaidi, ASC 
 
Date of Hearing: 
03.01.2022. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Tarifullah, 55/60, and 
Muhammad Rawail, 20, were shot dead on 11.06.2007 at 5:00 p.m.  
within the precincts of Police Station Razakhel, District Nowshera, in 
the backdrop of an ongoing feud over a piece of property; Tariq Azam 
PW survived the assault to report the incident to the police at 7:25 p.m; 
the petitioners claimed trial before a learned Addl. Sessions Judge at 
Nowshera that culminated into their conviction both on the charges of 
homicide as well as murderous assault vide judgment dated 
31.10.2013; they were sentenced to imprisonment for life as well as  
5-years rigorous imprisonment, respectively; co-accused Shahid, 
arrayed through supplementary statement, was, however, acquitted 
from the charge, maintained by the High Court, vide impugned 
judgment dated 06.10.2016, vires whereof, are being assailed by the 
petitioners on the grounds that prosecution case, fraught with 
contradictions and doubts, merited outright rejection, in the face of an 
unproved motive. Prosecution’s failure to effect recovery of weapon from 
Rooh Ullah petitioner yet another predicament faced by the prosecution 
 
and, thus, evidence furnished by the injured PW was far from being the 
whole truth and, thus, was not worthy of implicit reliance, concluded 
the learned counsel. Contrarily, learned Law Officer assisted by learned 
counsel for complainant defended the impugned judgment.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
We have gone through the statements of eye witnesses that 
include an injured to find them in a comfortable unison both on the 
salient features of the case as well as matters collateral thereto. No 
doubt, injuries on the person of a witness are not a passport into the 
realm of truth, however, the learned counsel has not been able to point 
out even a single circumstance to suspect testimony of Azam Tariq PW. 
Incident, a daylight affair, was reported with a remarkable promptitude 
followed by examination of the injured as well as autopsy,  
circumstances that cumulatively exclude possibility of consultations or 
deliberations. Investigating Officer’s failure to recover a weapon from 
Rooh Ullah does not overshadow the preponderance of prosecution 
evidence that includes recovery from the principal accused. Bald 
denials alone do not override the prosecution evidence, rightly relied by 
the courts below. Petition fails. Leave refused.  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
3rd January, 2022 
Azmat/- 
