IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.1001 of 2016 
(Against the judgment dated 11.05.2016 passed by 
the Peshawar High Court Peshawar in J. Cr.A. 224-
P/2013) 
 
Asfandiyar  
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
The State, etc.  
…Respondent(s) 
 
For thePetitioner(s): 
Mr. Muhammad Ilyas Siddiqi, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Anis M. Shahzad, ASC 
 
Date of hearing: 
01.02.2021. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-Indicted for committing 
Qatl-i-Amdof Muhammad Ali Shah, 26, on 15.4.2010 within the precincts of 
Police Station Lahore, District Swabi, in the backdrop of a monetary 
dispute, the petitioner was returned a guilty verdict by a learned Addl. 
Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 30.04.2013; convicted under clause 
(b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, he was sentenced to 
imprisonment for life. The High Court declined to interfere both with 
conviction as well as quantum of sentence, through consolidated judgment 
dated 11.5.2016. The convict seeks leave to appeal on the ground that 
there was no occasion for the High Court to maintain conviction resting 
upon flawed and discrepant evidence, furnished by a lone witness, related 
in first degree to the deceased and that prosecution’s failure to establish 
alleged motive completely demolished its case; that casings secured from 
the spot did not tally with the weapon allegedly recovered from the 
petitioner; the bottom line is that it would be unsafe to place implicit 
reliance on the statement of solitary eye witness, clamouring corroboration 
so as to maintain conviction on a capital charge. The learned Law Officer 
has faithfully defended the judgment.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Ahmad Ali Shah (PW-4) furnished ocular account about the 
incident, a daylight affair within thick of the locality, reported promptly to 
 Criminal Petition No.1001 of 2016 
2
the police within one hour; formal FIR was recorded at 1:45 p.m. whereas 
autopsy followed at 2:30 p.m. The brief interregnum does not admit 
possibility of deliberations or consultations, particularly in the face of 
nomination of single accused. Durations between injuries and death as 
well as death and postmortem are synchronized with the time of 
occurrence mentioned in the crime report. Though droppage of Abbas Ali 
Shah, real brother of the deceased, as being unnecessary, sans any 
apparent explanation, nonetheless, this fact by itself, does not militate 
against the testimony of his father Ahmad Ali Shah (PW-4), found by us 
consistent, straightforward and confidence inspiring, subjected to a 
grueling cross-examination at inordinate lengths, he returned from the 
witness box unscathed. Parental concerns seem weighing with a father as 
an overriding consideration for recusing the surviving son from treading a 
path fraught with hazards and, thus, taking solely upon himself onerous 
responsibility of prosecuting the case. Law does not require a particular 
number of witnesses to prove a criminal charge and statement of a solitary 
witness with a ring of truth is more than sufficient to drive home the 
charge; corroboration is a rule of prudence and not law and cannot be 
invariably insisted in every case. Belatedly taken plea of substitution by 
the petitioner that the deceased was done to death by one Ashfaq is 
nothing but a far cry; it is inconceivable that a father would substitute the 
assassin of his son with an innocent without rhyme or reason. 
Longstanding absconsion with arrest as late as on 2.5.2012 is yet another 
predicament bracing the petitioner. On an overall analysis of the evidence, 
we have not been able to find space to admit any hypothesis other than 
petitioner’s guilt; view concurrently taken by the Courts below, being 
unexceptionable, calls for no interference. Petition fails. Leave declined.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
1st February, 2021 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-