Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 2336 2013 SLD 2336 2013 PCRLJ 436
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1312 and Criminal Revision No. 1026 of 2011, heard on 24th October, 2012
MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J
Muhammad Imran Butt for Appellants. Muhammad Tanvir Chaudhry for the Complainant (in Criminal Revision No. 1026 of 2011). Ch. Muhammad Akhlaq, Deputy Prosecutor-General for the State

GHULAM AHMAD alias MUHAMMAD AAMER and another

VS

The STATE and another

Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 324/337-F (iii)/337-F(v)---Attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, ghayr-jaifah-munaqqillah--- Appreciation of evidence---Incident reported belatedly---Accused and co-accused persons, while armed with firearms, allegedly launched an attack on the complainant party---Accused was specifically alleged to have fired repeatedly at one of the injured prosecution witnesses---Alleged motive behind the occurrence was that 15/16 years prior to the present incident, father of accused was murdered by a person from the complainant side--- Trial Court convicted accused under Ss.324, 337-F(iii) and 337-F(v), P.P.C.---Validity---Matter was reported to the police after a delay of 56 hours without any reasonable explanation---Injured persons were medically examined on the day of the incident within the shortest span of time and police was also available at the hospital, but neither the complainant nor any eye-witness including injured persons made any statement at that time to the effect that injuries were caused by the accused and co-accused persons---Injured prosecution witness, who allegedly received injuries at the hands of the accused, categorically admitted in his cross-examination that he made a statement before the investigation officer for the first time after 10/12 days of the incident---Complainant and witnesses, who were not injured, had time to report the matter to the police at the earliest but they did not do so---Although one of the injured persons had deposed against the accused but his statement could not be taken as the gospel truth in the circumstances of the case---Motive for the occurrence did not appeal to reason as the person from the complainant side, who was alleged to have murdered father of accused, was acquitted and besides a period of two decades had passed since that incident---Recovery of weapon was inconsequential in absence of any positive report---Prosecution had not been able to prove its case against accused beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed, conviction and sentence imposed on accused was set-aside and he was acquitted of the charge. JUDGMENT MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU,…
🔒
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