Evidence of these witnesses is in the nature of waj takar, the probative strength of which rests in the doctrine of res gestae in view of Article 19 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984.

 PWs had heard the gunshot and witnessed the petitioner fleeing away from the place of occurrence after commission of offence while he was having a pistol in his hands. Evidence of these witnesses is in the nature of waj takar, the probative strength of which rests in the doctrine of res gestae in view of Article 19 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. The said doctrine of res gestae is based upon the assumption that statements of witnesses that constitute part of the res gestae are attributed a certain degree of reliability because they are contemporaneous making them admissible by virtue of their nature and strength of their connection with a particular event and their ability to explain it comprehensively. These prosecution witnesses were residents of the same locality, therefore, their presence at the place of occurrence was natural. These prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy crossexamination by the defence but nothing favourable to the petitioner or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record. These witnesses have given all necessary details of occurrence qua the date, time, place, name of accused, name of witnesses, manner of occurrence, kind of weapon used in the occurrence, the locale of injuries and the motive of occurrence. These PWs remained consistent on each and every material point inasmuch as they made deposition according to the circumstances surfaced in this case, therefore, it can safely be concluded that their statements are reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring.

There is no denial to this fact that these PWs were related with the deceased but the law in this regard is well settled. A related witness cannot be termed as an interested witness under all circumstances. A related witness can also be a natural witness. If an offence is committed within the presence of the family members then they assume the position of natural witnesses. In case, their evidence is reliable, cogent and clear, the prosecution case cannot be doubted. However, a related witness would become an interested witness when his evidence is tainted with malice and it shows that he is desirous of implicating the accused by fabricating and concocting evidence but the learned counsel for the petitioner could not show us anything in this regard. The Court is required that the evidence of an eyewitness who is a near relative of the victim should be closely scrutinized.

Where discrepancies are of minor character and do not go to the root of the prosecution story and do not shake the salient features of the prosecution version, they need not be given much importance.

J.P.206/2019
Muhammad Ijaz v. The State
Mr. Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi
08-05-2023