| Case ID |
736a63bf-b4e2-427f-a243-2ad6aba5f15d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Cr. A. No. 153-B and Cr. R. No. 44-B of 2013 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 29, 2015 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Peshawar High Court, presided over by Justices Yahya Afridi and Muhammad Younis Thaheem, partially upheld the appeal filed by Asim Raza against his conviction under sections 337-A(ii) and 337-F(ii) of the Penal Code. While maintaining the conviction and sentencing related to the payment of Arsh, the court acquitted Raza of all other charges, including those under sections 302, 324, and 34, due to insufficient evidence of common intention with the absconding co-accused. The court emphasized the lack of direct or circumstantial evidence linking Raza to the firearm-related offenses and highlighted the necessity of proving a prearranged common intention for vicarious liability. Consequently, Raza was sentenced to three years imprisonment for the payment of Arsh with the provision of three months imprisonment in default, while other charges were dismissed. The court also upheld the benefit under section 382-B of the Criminal Procedure Code, ensuring that Raza retains certain legal protections despite the conviction. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case Cr. A. No. 153-B and Cr. R. No. 44-B of 2013, adjudicated by the Peshawar High Court on January 29, 2015, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Muhammad Younis Thaheem delivered a pivotal judgment involving multiple charges under the Penal Code (XLV of 1860). The appellant, Asim Raza, faced severe accusations including Qatl-i-amd (murder), attempt to commit Qatl-i-amd, common intention, causing Shajjah-i-Mudihah liable to Arsh, and causing Badi'ah, under sections 302, 324, 34, 337-A(ii), and 337-F(ii) respectively. The prosecution presented compelling direct ocular evidence from three injured witnesses who attested to Raza's presence and active participation at the crime scene, utilizing a stick (kotak) in the assault. However, Raza's defense challenged the sufficiency of this evidence, arguing the absence of a common intention with co-accused individuals, whose actions were primarily firearm-related. The court meticulously analyzed the principles of common intention as outlined in section 34 of the Penal Code, referencing seminal cases such as Pandurang's case (PLD 1956 SC (India) 176), Muhammad Yaqoob's case (PLD 2001 SC 378), and Sh. Muhammad Abid's case (2011 SCMR 1148) to establish the necessity of a prearranged plan and concerted action among co-accused for joint liability. Concluding that the prosecution failed to demonstrate a shared intent to commit the more grievous offenses involving firearms, the court acquitted Raza of charges under sections 302, 324, and 34. Nonetheless, recognizing the incontrovertible evidence of Raza's involvement in the physical assault under section 337-A(ii), the court upheld his conviction for the payment of Arsh, sentencing him to three years of imprisonment with an additional three months in default. This judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that convictions are grounded in clear evidence of common intention, thereby safeguarding against the miscarriage of justice through unfounded vicarious liability. The case also highlights the intricate balance between prosecutorial evidence and the defense's challenge in establishing shared culpability, setting a precedent for future cases involving complex multi-faceted criminal charges. Additionally, the court's decision to uphold the benefit under section 382-B of the Criminal Procedure Code illustrates the layered protections afforded to accused individuals, further reinforcing the legal framework's emphasis on fairness and due process in the Pakistani judicial system. This case serves as a critical reference point for legal practitioners and scholars, emphasizing the rigorous standards required to prove joint criminal responsibility and the importance of detailed judicial reasoning in upholding the rule of law. |
| Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Muhammad Yaqoob,
Asim Raza,
Muhammad Hussain Khan,
Shahid Nasim Khan Chamkani,
M.Alamgir Wazir,
Shaukat Ali Khan,
Saifur Rehman,
Anwar Badshah,
Mst. Zafran Bibi,
Mst. Fazeelat Bibi,
Ghaniullah,
Niazmin Badshah,
Sh. Muhammad Abid
|
| Judges |
YAHYA AFRIDI,
MUHAMMAD YOUNIS THAHEEM
|
| Lawyers |
Shahid Nasim Khan Chamkani,
M.Alamgir Wazir,
Shaukat Ali Khan,
Saifur Rehman
|
| Petitioners |
Shahid Nasim Khan Chamkani,
M.Alamgir Wazir
|
| Respondents |
Shaukat Ali Khan
|
| Citations |
2015 SLD 2979 = 2015 YLR 2322
|
| Other Citations |
Pandurang's case PLD 1956 SC (India) 176,
Muhammad Yaqoob's case PLD 2001 SC 378,
Sh. Muhammad Abid's case 2011 SCMR 1148
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302,
324,
34,
337-A(ii),
337-F(ii)
|