| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2393 2015 SLD 2393 2015 PCRLJ 1227 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Jail Appeals Nos. 129 and 130 of 2011, decided on 31st January, 2013. DATE of hearing: 15th January, 2013.
SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, JJ
Muhammad Ashraf Kazi for Appellants. Khadim Hussain Khoonharo, Deputy Prosecutor-General Sindh for the State. Amir Mansoob Qureshi for the Complainant
Criminal Jail Appeals Nos. 129 and 130 of 2011, decided on 31st January, 2013. DATE of hearing: 15th January, 2013.
SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, JJ
Muhammad Ashraf Kazi for Appellants. Khadim Hussain Khoonharo, Deputy Prosecutor-General Sindh for the State. Amir Mansoob Qureshi for the Complainant
GHULAM HAIDER and another
VS
The STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 504 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Evidence of the eye-witnesses was trustworthy and reliable---Said witnesses had highlighted each and every aspect of tragic incident without making any glaring contradictions, omissions or concealment in their statements---All the witnesses had categorically deposed that accused fired the fatal shot, which caused death of deceased---Medical evidence was not contradictory to the ocular evidence---Prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination, but nothing favourable to accused came on record---Ocular evidence, was corroborated by medical evidence, strong motive and long abscondence of accused---Trial Court had rightly appreciated the prosecution evidence in its true perspective as murder of an innocent person had been committed by accused due to old enmity on account of admitted matrimonial dispute---Circumstances of the case had disentitled accused to any leniency in sentence---Accused deserved the normal penalty of death, which was rightly awarded to him by the Trial Court---Death sentence awarded to accused and murder reference made by the Trial Court was accepted and his appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Sheeraz Asghar v. The State 1995 SCMR 1365; Imam Ali v. The State 2011 PCr.LJ 1398; Muhammad Latif v. The State PLD 2008 SC 503 and Safdar Abbas and other v. The State 2008 MLD 1007 distinguished. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Interested witness---Statement of the witnesses on account of being interested witnesses, could only be discarded, if it was proved that an interested witness had ulterior motive on account of enmity or any other consideration---Evidence of interested witnesses could be taken into consideration without corroboration, and even uncorroborated version could be relied upon, if supported by surrounding circumstances. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 504 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Case of co-accused was distinguishable from the case…
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