Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 3521 2009 SLD 3521 2009 PCRLJ 1288
Quetta High Court
Criminal Appeal No. (S)66 and Murder Reference No.(S)15 of 2007, decided on 2nd April, 2009.Date of hearing: 19th March, 2009.
Before Akhtar Zaman Malghani and Muhammad Nadir Khan, JJ
Muhammad Aslam Chishti for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No(S)66 of 2007). Miss. Noor Jahan Kahoor for the State (in Criminal Appeal No(S)66 of 2007). Naeem Akhtar for the Complainant (in Criminal Appeal No(S)66 of 2007). Miss Noor Jahan Kahoor for

MITHAL alias BABAL and another----Appellants

VS

THE STATE----Respondents

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),337-F(ii),427

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 337-F(ii) & 427---Appreciation of evidence---Incident was stated to have taken place at mid night when it was dark night---Prosecution witnesses claimed to have identified accused person in the light of vehicle---Evidence of prosecution witnesses in that respect would require deep scrutiny as said eye-witnesses were not only inter-related, but were also cousins of deceased---Injured eye-witness was not resident of the area where incident had taken place---Story narrated by said witnesses with regard to identify accused persons in the light of motor vehicle, did not fit in the probability of the case---No motive had been disclosed against accused persons for committing murder of deceased or attacking the complainant party---Story narrated by eye-witness was not only improbable, but also contradictory to the other circumstantial evidence brought on record---F.I.R. was lodged after about 11 hours of the occurrence without any plausible explanation for such delay---Delay in lodging F.I.R. though in ordinary course alone was not sufficient to reject prosecution version, but in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, wherein the occurrence had occurred in dark hours of night and identification of culprits was doubtful, it had gained significance---Safe presumption was that the F.I.R. was not lodged promptly in order to gain time to deliberate and nominate culprits by claiming to have identified them at the :spot---Absence of enmity or relationship of witnesses with the complainant, could not stamp statements of the witnesses with truth which had to be analyzed in the light of peculiar facts and circumstances of each individual case---Fact that the kalashnikov remained with Police for about thirteen days in unsealed condition, had damaged veracity of firearm expert report, which even otherwise could not be believed because the empties recovered from the place of occurrence were not sent immediately to Firearm Expert---Positive report of Firearm Expert was of no consequence nor it could further improve the case of prosecution in such circumstances---In the light of diverse factors no implicit reliance could be…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492