Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 1084 2015 SLD 1084 2015 YLR 2734
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1841 of 2003, hearing Date : 20-04-2015.
AALIA NEELUM, JUSTICE, SYED SHAHBAZ ALI RIZVI, JUSTICE
Ch. Sadaqat Ali for Appellant. Muhammad Naseem Akhter, Deputy District Public Prosecutor for the State.

MUHAMMAD SARWAR

VS

MEHBOOB ALAM AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Qatl-i-amd---Appeal against acquittal---Reappraisal of evidence---Probable time between injury and death of deceased, was 2 to 3 hours whereas between death and post-mortem, was 10 to 12 hours---No plausible explanation was available as to why post-mortem of dead body was delayed for eleven hours---Such aspect of the matter was sufficient to cast doubt about the authenticity of the FIR and had created serious doubt about the genuineness of the prosecution story, including presence of the complainant at the scene of occurrence---Prosecution evidence, seemed to be afterthought---Features, complexion or likeness of unknown accused, were not described in the FIR, except that accused was described as middle height young man---Identification of accused during identification parade, was highly doubt-ful---Entire proceedings of identification parade had become doubtful, in circumstances---Blood stained "Khanjar" was recovered, after one month of the alleged occurrence---Report of the Serologist in that regard, could not be termed as reliable as it did not appeal to reason that accused had kept "Khanjar" with him intact in order to produce it before the Investigating Officer on his arrest---Accused, could not be expected to keep the blood stained "Khanjar" in his house for a long period, when he could have easily disposed off the same---Testimony of prosecution witness, was not probable, and discrepancy in her statement was enough to discard the veracity of her statement---Taking into consideration, material on record, and the evidence adduced in the trial, there was no reason to take any view contrary to the view taken by the Trial Court---Prosecution had failed to bring true facts before the court---Story of incident was highly doubtful, witnesses were not trustworthy, as they had given contrary statements on material points---Impugned of the Trial Court could not be interfered with, in circum-stances---Appeal against acquittal, was dismissed, in circumstances. Ibrahim and others v. The State 2009 SCMR 407 and Bashir Ahmed alias Mannu v. The State PLD 1996 Pesh. 25 rel. (b)…
🔒
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