Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 173,265-C,340(2),342,374

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Both the eye-witnesses were closely related inter-se and with the deceased---Mere relationship of witnesses was not sufficient to discard their evidence and declare them interested witnesses, unless there was any enmity between the parties to falsely implicate accused in a case---Motive of the incident itself had disclosed enmity between the parties---Because of previous enmity between the parties, witnesses, could be termed as interested witnesses---Statements of interested witnesses, no doubt could be relied upon for recording the conviction of an accused if said . witnesses would satisfy the court that they had witnessed the incident and they had spoken the whole truth coupled with the fact that their statements were corroborated by some independent piece of evidence---Occurrence had not taken place near the house or place of residence of deceased or the witnesses, but had taken place in the field---Contradiction was found in the statements of both eye-witnesses regarding role ascribed to accused---Medical evidence had contradicted the ocular account---Claim of the witnesses that accused had fired at deceased by putting his gun over his body had been found in contradiction with the medical evidence and site-plan---Contradiction also existed in the statements of both the witnesses regarding role of accused---No independent piece of evidence was available on the record to corroborate statements of witnesses who otherwise were interested being inimical---Delay in the post-mortem of deceased led to draw an inference that F.I.R. was not recorded with promptitude---Possibility could not be ruled out that police papers were not ready for production before the Doctor and the time was consumed to concoct the story and introduce the close relatives of the deceased as witnesses---Such F.I.R. could not be used as a corroborative piece of evidence---Complainant party had also the motive to falsely implicate accused due to previous enmity---Merely because of motive accused could not be held responsible for the offence---Recovery of carbine from accused was useless as said…

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