Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 1265 2003 SLD 1265 2003 PCRLJ 1346
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 104-T and Murder Reference No. 26/T of 2002, decided on 17th April, 2002.
BASHIR A. MUJAHID AND MIAN MUHAMMAD, JEHANGIR, JJ
Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi for Appellant. Sajid Hamdani for the: State.

MUHAMMAD USMAN

VS

THE STATE

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302/353

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---   ----Ss. 302/353---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7--¬Appreciation of evidence---Occurrence had taken place in the dark night and the prosecution had failed to prove availability of electric bulb at the spot---Complainant and prosecution witness had admitted that the deceased who was a police officer, was not in police uniform at the place of occurrence and Investigating Officer had failed to show that deceased had gone to perform his official duty at the relevant time---Prosecution witness having admitted that on relevant time it was raining, it was not possible to take into possession the blood through cotton from the spot---Occurrence had taken place in open public place but none of the public witness was cited or examined by the prosecution which had created serious doubt about the occurrence that it had not taken place as had been alleged by the prosecution---No features/particulars of the accused were given by the complainant or prosecution witness, except the body structure of the accused---Accused were not identified by the role allegedly played by them---Accused were already arrested in some other case and both the eye-witnesses being the police employees, possibility could not be ruled out that they had seen the accused before identification parade---Identification parade, in circumstances, could not be relied upon to maintain the conviction of the accused---Pistol was recovered from a house of the accused of which key was already with Investigating Officer and the house was also opened by Investigating Officer and no public witness from the locality was associated in the recovery proceedings---Provisions of S.103, Cr.P.C. having been violated in recovery proceedings, recovery of pistol could not be relied upon---Prosecution having failed to establish its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt, the accused were acquitted extending them benefit of doubt.   Ghulam Rasool v. State 1988 SCMR 557; Yaqub Khan v. State PLD 1996 SC 97; Mehmood Ahmad and others v. The State 1995 SCMR 127; 1995 SCMR 127 and Khadim Hussain v. State 1985 SCMR 721 ref.   Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi for Appellant.  …
🔒
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