| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3407 2003 SLD 3407 2003 PLD 70 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 361 and 362 of 1994; decided on 21st October, 2002.
SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
STATE through the Advocate General, N.W.F.P., PeshawarAppellant Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 361 of 1994). Sardar Muhammad Siddique Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 1. (in Criminal Appeal No. 36
Criminal Appeals Nos. 361 and 362 of 1994; decided on 21st October, 2002.
SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
STATE through the Advocate General, N.W.F.P., PeshawarAppellant Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 361 of 1994). Sardar Muhammad Siddique Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 1. (in Criminal Appeal No. 36
STATE through the AdvocatEGeneral, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar court
VS
SHAH JEHAN
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to the State to examine whether High Court was legally justified in extending the benefit of doubt to the accused in absence of any doubt about his mis-identity and in view of the ocular evidence being supported by medical evidence, motive, retracted confession and other circumstantial evidence. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185---Appeal against acquittal---Three hours' unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R. showed that it was lodged after preliminary investigation, deliberation and consultation and that the complainant was called from his village situate at a distance of three miles---Retracted judicial confession of accused was not in conformity with the ocular evidence with regard to the time and circumstances of the occurrence and it was also not in consonance with medical. evidence especially about the number of shots fired at the deceased and was not corroborated by material particulars---Recovery of the weapon of offence was neither made at the instance of accused nor in his presence---Acquittal of accused by High Court was not, based on any misreading or non-reading of the material evidence or misconstruction of law---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. JUDGMENT SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--By this common judgment we intend to dispose of Criminal- Appeals Nos.361 and 362-6f 1994, which are directed against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, Bench at D.I. Khan, dated 16-10-1993, passed in Criminal Appeal No,7 and. Murder Reference No. 1 of 1993. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 10-7-1991 at 'Digar Qazawela' complainant Muhammad Hussain (P.W.8) went to the house of respondent Shah Jehan to see his daughter. In the presence of the complainant, accused-Shah Jehan while talking to his wife Mst. Hanifa Bibi got infuriated, pulled out a .12 bore pistol from the fold of his Shalwar and fired at the deceased, as a result of which she died at the spot. Thereafter he «ave a blow on the head of his mother with the butt of the pistol and then ran away…
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