Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979

Section: 10(3)(4),11

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 410,417(2-A)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 148,149,324,397,460

(a) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)--- ----Ss.10(3)(4) & 11---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 397, 460, 148 & 149---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Zina-bil-jabr, liable to tazir, kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievance hurt, lurking house-trespass by night, rioting, common object---Appeal against acquittal---Appraisal of evidence---F.I.R. was lodged in the case with delay and no explanation was available for the same---Witnesses produced by the prosecution were inter se closely related---None of the independent witnesses who were allegedly attracted to the place of occurrence after hearing firearm alarm, had been produced---No gun or rifle etc. allegedly looted by accused, was recovered from them---Sotas, had been recovered, but being commonly available items and not being conclusive proof, could not be used as substantive piece of evidence to prove the charge beyond any doubt---Though the injuries on the person of three prosecution witnesses, which did not appear self implicated, had shown their presence on the spot, non-production of the independent material witnesses, created doubts about veracity of deposition made by related prosecution witnesses---Nikah between accused and alleged abductee was duly solemnized, and alleged abductee had filed suit for jactitation of marriage---Counter suit for restitution of conjugal rights was also filed by accused against alleged abductee---Suit filed by accused for restitution of conjugal rights was decreed, while suit for jactitation of marriage was dismissed---Said of Family Court had finalized the matter of restitution of conjugal rights in favour of accused which had created dent in the case of prosecution, and charge of abduction etc. in the circumstances had also become highly doubtful---Accused persons having acquitted, had earned double presumption of innocence---For setting aside acquittal, unimpeachable evidence was required, which was not forthcoming on record---Charge against accused persons, having not been proved beyond reasonable…

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