Ss. 302(b) & 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Statements of eye-witnesses that included an injured were in comfortable unison both on the salient features of the case as well as matters collateral thereto---No doubt, injuries on the person of a witness were not a passport into the realm of truth, however, the counsel for accused had not been able to point out even a single circumstance to suspect testimony of the injured eye-witness---Incident, which was a daylight affair, was reported with remarkable promptitude followed by examination of the injured as well as autopsy, circumstances that cumulatively excluded possibility of consultations or deliberations---Investigating Officer's failure to recover a weapon from one of the accused did not overshadow the preponderance of prosecution evidence that included recovery from the principal accused---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, and convictions and sentences passed against the accused persons were maintained. 2022  SCMR  888

Detail of injuries by P.Ws. is not required to be given in a photographic manner. (DB) PLJ 1990 Cr.C. 43 Ghulam Hassan.
Punishment for injuries cannot be awarded for those injured who do not appear at the trial nor account for their injuries satisfactorily or who do not name their assailants. 1992 SCMR 2037, Manzoor, 1992 SCMR 2088, Asghar Ali etc.
Suppressing injuries on accused, evidence of such eye-witness not relied upon. NLR 1989 Cr. 657 Falak Sher.
Suppression of injuries on the accused by eye-witnesses damages their veracity and injures their integrity, shaking the confidence of the court. In such cases rule of prudence requires corroboration of the statements of such eye-witnesses. 1994 SCMR 1928, Muhammad Iqbal v. Abid Hussain.
Injured eye-witnesses' version supported by other eye-witnesses, although related to the deceased, yet having no enmity with the accused, relied upon and acquittal set aside. 1989 SCMR 1461. Shehr-ud-Din v. Allah Rakhio etc.
Injured not making statement about his own injury, it is difficult to sustain conviction regarding that injury, on the statements of others. 1991 SCMR 241 Sher Khan etc.
Injuries on PW only an indication of his presence at the spot but is not an affirmative proof of his credibility and truth. (DB) PLJ 1990 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 140 Atta Ullah etc.
Injuries on eye-witnesses do not lead to the presumption that they had suffered injuries during the occurrence at hostile hands. (DB) NLR 1989 Cr. 471 Hameed Akhtar etc.
Eye-witnesses closely related to deceased not injured during occurrence indicates no circumstantial guarantee or judicial sanctity of their presence at the spot, rendering their evidence unreliable. NLR 1989 Cr. 341 Muhammad Luqman.
Injured eye-witness involved as accused in counter-case cannot be relied upon implicity, without independent corroboration. Recovery of blood-stained weapons enough corroboration. (DB) 1972 P.Cr.LJ 1336 Punhoon etc.
Injuries on eye-witnesses is a proof of their presence at the spot but it does not guarantee that they are truthful. PLD 1979 Pesh. 190 State v. Fateh Muhammad.
Injured witnesses. The fact of witness being injured and such injuries not self-suffered is not by itself indicative of witnesses having told truth. 1981 SCMR 795 Said Ahmed v. Zumurad Hussain.
Injured witnesses no guarantee of truth. Mere fact that the witnesses were injured during the occurrence is not guarantee that the witnesss are also truthful. (DB) 1980 P.Cr.LJ 1245. State v. Fateh Muhammad etc.
Testimony of injured witness requires corroboration when his statement does not inspire confidence. PLJ 1995 S.C. 1, Mehmood Ahmed etc.
Injured eye-witnesses: Stamp of fire-arm injuries on the prosecution witnesses is not per se tantamount to a stamp of credence on their testimony. 1996 SCMR 1411, Muhammad Hayat etc.
Injured witness: The presence of injured witness at the spot can be presumed but injuries on their persons are not a guarantee that they are telling the truth. (DB) NLR 1984 Cr. 321. Naseer Ahmed.
Injured witness. Presence of complainant proved by a firearm injuries on his person but his enmity with accused rendered his testimony doubtful. Acquittal not interfered with. PLJ 1981 SC 12 Ghulam Shabir v. Bachal.
Mere presence of injuries on a person does not mean that he was necessarily present at the spot. (DB) AIR 1981 Lah. 150 Jawand Singh v. Emperor.
Injured witness not produced. It showed that such witness did not appear to avoid wrath of the accused party. Non-production of injured witnesses does not detract from the testimony of eye-witnesses actually preduced. PLJ 1984 SC 514. Muhammad Afzal v. Faqir etc.
All P.Ws. injured and supporting prosecution story without contradiction, the P.Ws. related to the deceased but corroborated by production, of blood-stained hatchets. Conviction upheld. (SC) 1974 SCMR 430 Doso.
Injured eye-witnesses establish their presence at the spot. Such witnesses however not giving correct version of incident and giving twist ot story to make it appear that the accused launched attack on complainant party. Witnesses, held, had no respect for truth and their testimony, cannot be accepted. 1974 P.Cr.LJ Note 169 Ahmed Ali etc.