Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 971 2014 SLD 971 2014 YLR 2227
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1405 and Murder Reference No. 420 of2010, heard on 28-02-2014.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Barrister Muhammad Yar Khan Daha for Appellant.Mirza Abid Majeed, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.Saif Ullah Khan for the Complainant.

HAZAR KHAN ALIAS BAGGIVS THE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---F.I.R., in the case was recorded one hour after the occurrence, and postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was conducted after about eleven hours after the occurrence, in such a situation, possibility of preliminary inquiry and consultation prior to the reporting of the matter to the Police, could not be ruled out---Complainant and prosecution witnesses had made improvements in their statements---Witness of ocular account had not disclosed any plausible reason for his presence at the spot at relevant time---Abscondence of accused, had not been proved in accordance with law---No order in writing was available on the record by the court issuing proclamation which under S.87, Cr.P.C. was mandatory---Alleged abscondence of accused, could not be used against him---When as per own version of the complainant the earlier matter was patched up, then no reason or occasion was left for accused to commit murder---Abscondence and motive, at the most being corroborative pieces of evidence, and relevant only if primary evidence i.e. ocular account was confidence inspiring, which was not the situation in the present case---Recovery of .8 MM rifle, allegedly effected at the instance of accused, was inconsequential as no empty was recovered from the spot and no report of Forensic Science Laboratory was available on the record---Prosecution case being of doubtful nature, there was no need to discuss the version of accused recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C.---Prosecution having failed to connect accused with the commission of crime, conviction and sentence awarded to accused by the Trial Court, were setaside---Accused was acquitted of the charge levelled against him, extending him benefit of doubt and was ordered to be released, in circumstances. Ayub Masih v. The State PLD 2002 SC 1048 ref. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Witness---Improvement made by witness in his statement---Effect---When a witness would improve his statement to strengthen the prosecution case; and the moment it was concluded that the improvements were made deliberately and with mala fide, the…
🔒
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