Muhammad V. The State,
YLR 2024 1317 · Balochistan High Court
Muhammad, son of Sakhidad, was convicted by a trial court of murdering Muhammad Ayaz by shooting him inside a house in Panjgur in September 2022, and was sentenced to life imprisonment plus compensation to the victim's heirs. He appealed to the Balochistan High Court challenging his conviction.
The High Court examined the evidence closely. Several eyewitnesses, including people present in the house and neighbors, gave consistent, detailed accounts of seeing the accused fire the fatal shot. The court noted these witnesses were "natural" witnesses whose presence at the scene made sense, and that despite lengthy cross-examination, the defense could not undermine their credibility or suggest any reason they would falsely frame the accused while protecting the real killer.
The court also addressed the fact that some witnesses were relatives of the deceased, explaining that relationship alone does not make testimony unreliable—family members present during a crime naturally become witnesses, and it would be illogical for relatives to wrongly accuse an innocent person while letting the actual murderer go free.
Additionally, the medical evidence (gunshot wounds) matched the witnesses' accounts, and forensic reports confirmed the recovered 9mm pistol and spent cartridges matched the crime scene, along with positive bloodstain analysis.
Finding the prosecution's case solid and uncontradicted, the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence. The case illustrates how Pakistani courts evaluate ey
محمد ولد سخی داد کو ایک ٹرائل کورٹ نے ستمبر 2022 میں پنجگور میں ایک گھر کے اندر محمد ایاز کو گولی مار کر قتل کرنے کے جرم میں مجرم قرار دیا تھا اور اسے عمر قید کے ساتھ ساتھ مقتول کے ورثاء کو معاوضہ ادا کرنے کی سزا سنائی گئی تھی۔ اس نے اپنی سزا کے خلاف بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ میں اپیل دائر کی۔
ہائی کورٹ نے شواہد کا بغور جائزہ لیا۔ کئی عینی شاہدین، جن میں گھر میں موجود افراد اور پڑوسی شامل تھے، نے ملزم کو جان لیوا گولی چلاتے دیکھنے کے حوالے سے یکساں اور تفصیلی بیانات دیے۔ عدالت نے نوٹ کیا کہ یہ گواہ "فطری" گواہ تھے جن کی جائے وقوعہ پر موجودگی بالکل منطقی تھی، اور یہ کہ طویل جرح کے باوجود دفاع ان کی ساکھ کو مجروح نہ کر سکا ا