Summary: In case of death due to vasovagal inhibition/shock by blunt trauma cannot be termed as natural death and offence will fall within ambit of offence under section 316, PPC. The amount of diyat shall be imposed according to the rate prevalent during the fiscal year when the case is decided by the court and not according to the date when the occurrence took place. -----Background: In this case, the appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment following an incident in 2015. The appellant allegedly caused the victim’s death by repeatedly kicking and punching him. The trial court found the appellant guilty based on the testimonies of eyewitnesses and medical evidence, leading to this appeal, where the appellant claimed innocence and argued that three other individuals were responsible for the victim’s death. -----Issues: 1- Whether the prosecution’s eyewitnesses were credible and present at the time of the incident. -----2- Whether the medical evidence corroborated the prosecution’s case. -----3- Whether the delay in conducting the autopsy compromised the case against the appellant. -----4- Whether the nature of the assault (kicks and fists) qualified as “qatl-i-amd” (intentional murder) or “qatl shibh-i-amd” (quasi-intentional murder) under the PPC. -----Holding / Reasoning / Outcome: --Eyewitness Testimonies: The court found that the eyewitnesses were credible, providing consistent accounts that aligned with the sequence of events described in the FIR. Although related to the deceased, the court ruled their testimonies valid and emphasized that substitution of actual perpetrators is rare in cases where close relatives witness the crime. --Medical Evidence: Medical findings, including bruises and an abrasion on sensitive areas like the left scrotum, aligned with the eyewitnesses' accounts of the injuries inflicted. The court accepted the doctor’s conclusion that the cause of death was vasovagal shock due to blunt trauma to the testis. --Autopsy Delay: The delay in conducting the autopsy was attributed to the non-availability of senior doctors overnight. The court held that this delay did not imply manipulation of the evidence, as the FIR was filed promptly, and essential details of the incident were clearly stated. --Nature of Offense: The court ruled that the nature of the assault did not constitute “qatl-i-amd” (intentional murder), as the injuries were caused by kicks and fists, not weapons. The court reclassified the offense as “qatl shibh-i-amd” under Section 315 PPC, reducing the sentence to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with payment of diyat (compensation) to the legal heirs of the deceased as per the current rate for the fiscal year. -----Citations / Precedents: Muhammad Bashir and another vs. The State and others (2023 SCMR 190) Abdul Wahid vs. The State (2023 SCMR 1278) Muhammad Hayat and another vs. The State (2021 SCMR 92) Abdul Wasay and others vs. The State and others (2021 SCMR 1059) Gul Zarin and others vs. Kamal-ud-Din and others (2022 SCMR 1085) Ijaz Ahmed vs. The State and others (2022 SCMR 1577) Azhar Hussain and another vs. The State and others (2022 SCMR 1907) Shamsher Ahmad and another vs. The State and others (2022 SCMR 1931) Asfandiyar vs. The State and other (2021 SCMR 2009) Conclusion The appellant’s conviction was reclassified to qatl shibh-i-amd with a sentence of 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment and diyat payment according to the prevailing rate. The appeal was thus partially accepted, modifying the original sentence under Section 302(b) PPC.