| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2374 2015 SLD 2374 2015 PCRLJ 1007 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 1386, 1387, 270-J of 2008 and MurderReference No. 5 of 2009, heard on 25th April, 2013. dates ofhearing: 23rd and 25th April, 2013.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK AND MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, JJ
Rao Muhammad Naeem Hashim, Sikandar Zulqarnain Saleem and Rao Javed Khurshid for Appellants. Ms. Fouzia Sultana Advocate/defence counsel at State expenses for the Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 270-J of 2008). Arshad Mahmood, Deputy Prosecutor-General
Criminal Appeals Nos. 1386, 1387, 270-J of 2008 and MurderReference No. 5 of 2009, heard on 25th April, 2013. dates ofhearing: 23rd and 25th April, 2013.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK AND MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, JJ
Rao Muhammad Naeem Hashim, Sikandar Zulqarnain Saleem and Rao Javed Khurshid for Appellants. Ms. Fouzia Sultana Advocate/defence counsel at State expenses for the Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 270-J of 2008). Arshad Mahmood, Deputy Prosecutor-General
MUHAMMAD SARWAR and othersvsThe STATE
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 396, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, dacoity with murder, rioting, common object---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused persons, neither were nominated in the FIR, nor their description was mentioned in the FIR; and no identification parade was conducted---Case of prosecution was that seven unknown accused persons participated in the occurrence and resorted to firing at the deceased, but there was only one firearm injury on the person of deceased as per medical evidence---Three co-accused who were also assigned the role of making fire at the deceased had been acquitted by the Trial Court and their acquittal had attained finality as no appeal was filed against said acquittal---Role attributed to accused persons, was similar to that of acquitted co-accused---Recoveries of .12 bore guns at the instance of two accused persons, were of no avail to the prosecution as no report of Forensic Science Laboratory about wedding of any empty with the said guns was available on record---Nothing was recovered from third accused during investigation---No specific identification mark or denomination of any currency Notes was mentioned in the FIR---No specific identification mark on allegedly recovered currency notes, had been mentioned in the recovery memo.---Recovery of cash amount of Rs.150 only which was easily available with almost every person, at the instance of accused, and was of no avail to the prosecution---No independent corroboration was found against accused persons---Case of accused persons was not distinguishable from the case of acquitted co-accused---Prosecution, in circumstances, had failed to prove its case against accused persons beyond any shadow of doubt---Convictions and sentences awarded to accused persons, by the Trial Court were set aside extending them benefit of doubt---Accused were acquitted from the charges levelled against them and they were released, in circumstances. Iftikhar Hussain and another v. State 2004 SCMR 1185 and Akhtar Ali and others v. The State 2008 SCMR 6 rel. JUDGMENT MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, J.---This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No.1386 of 2008 titled as…