IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.566 OF 2021 
(Against the judgment dated 03.05.2021 of 
the Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench 
(Dar-ul-Qaza), 
Swat 
passed 
in 
Criminal 
Appeal No.44-M/2021) 
 
 
Hayat Muhammad 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
Versus 
State through Additional Advocate General, KP and another 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Asadullah Khan Chamkani, ASC 
 
 
For the State: 
Mian Shafaqat Jan, Addl.A.G. KPK 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
20.09.2021 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Through this petition 
under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 
1973, the petitioner has called in question the judgment of the 
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench (Dar-ul-Qaza) Swat dated 
03.05.2021 whereby his appeal was partially allowed. 
2. 
 
As per contents of the crime report bearing FIR No.38 dated 
25.05.2020 registered under Sections 324, 148, 149, 337D, 337F(iii) 
and 337F(v) PPC at Police Station Talash District Lower Dir lodged by 
Lal Muhammad son of Taj Muhammad it was alleged that five persons 
in furtherance of common intention gathered close to his house and cut 
down the water pipeline. One of the accused Hayat Muhammad turned 
furiated and made fire shots with his pistol which landed on the front 
left side of abdomen, as a consequence the complainant sustained 
injury. The motive behind the occurrence was disclosed as cutting of 
water pipeline. In pursuance of the aforesaid crime report, the matter 
was entrusted to Additional Sessions Judge, Timergara, District Lower 
Dir. Charge in the aforesaid crime was framed against the accused 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.566 OF 2021 
-: 2 :- 
persons. After completion of the same, the petitioner was convicted and 
sentenced as under:- 
 
 
(i) 
Under Section 324 PPC to seven years RI;  
 
(ii) 
Under Section 337-D PC to five years RI 
with directions to pay arsh equal to 1/3 of 
diyat to the injured; 
 
(iii) 
337F(iii) PPC to one year RI with directions 
to pay Rs.50,000/- as daman to the 
injured; and  
 
(iv) 
337F(v) PPC to one year imprisonment with 
directions to pay Rs.50,000/- as daman to 
the injured.  
 
 
 
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The 
judgment of the Trial Court was assailed before the learned High Court 
through Criminal Appeal No.44-M/2021. The learned High Court after 
taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and 
providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties, maintained the 
conviction awarded to the petitioner under Sections 324 and 337-D 
PPC, however reduced the sentence from 07 years to 05 years Rigorous 
Imprisonment under Section 324 PPC, whereas the conviction and 
sentences awarded under Sections 337-F(iii) and 337-F(v) were set 
aside. 
3. 
 
During the course of proceedings before this Court, the 
learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the 
statements of Lal Muhammad (PW-3) and Bakhtiar Ahmad (PW-4) of the 
ocular account are at variance which do not inspire confidence. 
Contends that other prosecution witnesses produced by the prosecution 
are only corroborative in nature, hence the conviction and sentences 
recorded by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court are not 
sustainable in the eyes of law. When confronted, the learned counsel 
admitted that it is now settled principle of law that the statement of 
injured PW if corroborative with medical evidence is sufficient for 
conviction.  
4. 
 
On the other hand, the learned Law Officer has opposed 
the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and 
supported the judgments of the Trial Court and the learned High Court.  
5. 
 
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and 
gone through the record. 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.566 OF 2021 
-: 3 :- 
 
 
There is no denial to this fact that the occurrence has taken 
place in a broad daylight and the parties are known to each other. The 
role ascribed to the petitioner by the injured PW, Lal Muhammad, 
clearly reflects that the statement made by him was not confusing in 
any manner rather the same is fully corroborated by medical evidence 
as Dr. Muhammad Iqbal (PW-12) has clearly reported in his testimony 
that there was an inversion wound with no blackening on left groin 
region with corresponding hole 1x1 cm on shalwar and qameez with 
blood stain, therefore, the medical evidence fully corroborates the 
statement of injured so far as the time, locale and nature of injuries is 
concerned. There was absolutely no chance of mis-identification, 
otherwise the substitution is a rare phenomenon in the instant case. We 
have gone through the statement of PW-3, Lal Muhammad who 
sustained injuries and found that the statement of injured PW is 
straightforward, confidence inspiring and does not left any room to 
reconsider the conviction and sentences awarded to the petitioner. After 
the occurrence, the pistol was snatched from the petitioner by PW-7 
Sirajullah and was subsequently handed over to the SHO. From the 
place of occurrence two empties were also taken into possession. Both 
the pistol and the empties were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for 
examination and the report received is to the effect that the empties 
were fired from the pistol. As the prosecution has produced the ocular 
account, medical evidence and the same is also corroborated by the 
statement of the Investigating Officer, there is no possibility left to 
establish that both the courts below have not appreciated the law in its 
true perspective. Resultantly, this petition being devoid of merit is 
dismissed and leave is refused. 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
20th of September, 2021 
Approved for reporting 
Waqas Naseer/* 
