| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 945 2010 SLD 945 2010 PLJ 656 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. Appeal No. 387/J of 2003 & M.R. No. 615 of 2003, decided on 05.04.2010. Hearing Date : 25.03.2010.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, MUHAMMAD ANWAR BHAUR, JUSTICE
Mr. Naseem Sabir Chaudhry, Advocate assisted by Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate for Appellant at State expense. Mr. M.M. Alam, A.P.G. Pb. for State. Syed Naeem Shahid, Advocate assisted by Mr. Shakeel Anwar Virk, Advocate for Complainant.
Crl. Appeal No. 387/J of 2003 & M.R. No. 615 of 2003, decided on 05.04.2010. Hearing Date : 25.03.2010.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, MUHAMMAD ANWAR BHAUR, JUSTICE
Mr. Naseem Sabir Chaudhry, Advocate assisted by Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate for Appellant at State expense. Mr. M.M. Alam, A.P.G. Pb. for State. Syed Naeem Shahid, Advocate assisted by Mr. Shakeel Anwar Virk, Advocate for Complainant.
IFTIKHAR HAMAD ALIAS KHARI
VS
STATE
Law:
Section:
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 302(b)--Conviction and sentence recorded against appellant by trial Court--Challenge to--Benefit of doubt--Abscondence of appellant was with a design to remove all the prosecution evidence--Appellant did not surrender to police till the murder of two important eye-witnesses--Reports of process server on the warrants of arrest and proclamation were not put to appellant when his statement was recorded--Every criminal case has to be decided as per its own facts and circumstances--Evidence of some other case cannot be read while deciding the fate of the case--Abscondence may be relevant fact but the same cannot be used for entailing conviction on capital charge alone when the ocular account is not trustworthy and does not get any corroboration from any other source--Held: Principle by Hon'ble Apex Court, extended the benefit of doubt to appellant--Conviction and sentence set aside and appellant acquitted--Appeal allowed. 2009 SCMR 230, 1974 P.Cr.L.J. 208, 2005 P.Cr.LJ. 1667 & 2006 SCMR 1707, ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD ANWAR BHAUR, J.- Iftikhar Ahmad alias Khari and Intizar Ahmad alias Tari sons of Mushtaq Ahmad were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala for the murder of Ghulam Mustafa deceased, son of Muhammad Siddique-complainant in case F.I.R. No. 316, dated 1.12.2000, registered under Sections 302/34/109 P.P.C. with Police Station Kot Ladha, District Gujranwala. The learned trial Judge by virtue of his judgment dated 28.6.2003 found Iftikhar Ahmad alias Khari guilty of the said charge, convicted him under Section 302(b) P.P.C. and sentenced him to death with further direction to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased under Section 544-A Cr.P.C. or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The said learned Judge by giving benefit of doubt to Intizar Ahmad alias Tari, acquitted him of the charge. 2. The convict, namely, Iftikhar Ahmad alias Khari (hereinafter to be called as the appellant) by filing Criminal Appeal No. 387/J of 2003 has called in question the conviction and sentence awarded to him through…
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