IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition Nos.513 & 102-P of 2021 
(Against the judgment dated 19.3.2021 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court Bannu Bench Bannu in Crl. A. No.7-B/2021) 
 
Muhammad Anwar 
(in C.P.513/2021) 
Dildar Hussain 
(in C.P.102-P/2021) 
 
 
…..Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State through A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 
another  
(in C.P.513/2021) 
Muhammad Anwar and another  
(in C.P.102-P/2021) 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Asghar Ali Khan, ASC 
 
(in Cr.P.513/2021) 
 
Mr. Tariq Khan Kakar, ASC 
 
(in Cr.P.102-P/2021) 
 
     
 
 
For the State:              
Mr. Zahid Yousaf Qurshi,  
 
Addl. Prosecution General, KP  
 
Date of Hearing          
28.01.2022. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
        Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Indicted for 
murderous assault, Muhammad Anwar, petitioner, was returned 
a guilty verdict by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Banda Daud 
Shah, District Kark; convicted under section 324 of the Pakistan 
Penal Code, 1860, he was sentenced to 8-years RI with a 
direction to pay fine; on coordinate charges, arisen out of injuries 
endured by Diladar Hussain (PW-6), he was directed to pay 
monetary compensation in terms of Daman. The High Court 
maintained the conviction, however, reduced the sentence of 
imprisonment of 8-years to 4-years vide impugned judgment 
dated 19.03.2021, leave to appeal wherefrom is being prayed for. 
2. 
 
On the eventful day, i.e. 01.04.2019, Dildar Hussain 
was present in the village mosque when at 2:00 p.m. within the 
Criminal Petition Nos.513 & 102-P of 2021 
view of witnesses, the petitioner armed with a .30 caliber pistol 
targeted him with multiple fire shots. Motive for the crime was a 
dispute over installation of water connection. The injured was 
shifted to the hospital where the Medical Officer noted three entry 
wounds with corresponding exits involving right hypochondrium, 
umbilicus and dorsal side of right feet. The casings secured from 
the spot were opined to have been fired from one weapon, never 
recovered during the investigation.  
3. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the 
courts ran in concurrence of error inasmuch as the prosecution 
had miserably failed to prove its case on the strength of proof 
beyond doubt; that independent witnesses, admittedly present in 
the mosque, did not come forward to support the complainant, 
himself no other than real brother of the injured; that forensic 
report regarding casings in the absence of any wedded weapon 
hardly lent any support to the prosecution. Nature of injuries 
fails 
to 
constitute 
“intention 
or 
knowledge” 
within 
the 
contemplation of section 324 of the Act, a sine qua non, to attract 
mischief thereof and, thus, the petitioner could only be saddled 
with the monetary compensation for the injuries endured by the 
witness, being outcome of assault simpliciter, concluded the 
learned counsel. The learned Law Officer faithfully defended the 
impugned judgment. 
4. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
5. 
 
The occurrence is a daylight affair inside village 
mosque at a point of time where the presence of witnesses cannot 
be viewed as improbable. The incident is reported to the police 
with a remarkable promptitude, followed by medical examination 
that conclusively confirms receipt of three fire shots with a 
weapon awfully lethal by all means. Survival of the victim is 
nothing less than a miracle; he came forward to unambiguously 
point his accusing finger upon the petitioner, a solitary assailant 
at the scene. It would be naive to argue that three consecutive 
fires hitting different parts of the body do not constitute “intention 
or knowledge” and circumstances contemplated by section 324 of 
the Act ibid to bring petitioner’s case within the remit of the said 
statutory provision. Aftermaths of a deadly assault particularly by 
Criminal Petition Nos.513 & 102-P of 2021 
firearm cannot be quantified on the touchstone of degree of 
concomitant violence experienced by a victim; it is not his 
perseverance or endurance that determines assailant’s culpability 
nor intervention by  Providence presents him any extenuating 
option; it is solely his own conduct that decisively determines the 
intention regardless of the consequences thereof. Likewise, 
primary punishment for murderous assault is imprisonment that 
may extend to 10-years; punishment provided for the injuries is, 
in addition thereto, so as to monetarily compensate the victim, 
having no indemnifying effects on the former. Criminal Petition 
No.513 of 2021 fails. Leave declined.  
Much water has flown under the bridge and, thus, we do 
not feel inclined to enhance sentence at this point of time. 
Criminal Petition No.102-P of 2021 also fails; leave declined. 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
28th January, 2022 
Azmat/-