| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2974 2015 SLD 2974 2015 PCRLJ 1685 |
Islamabad High Court
Murder Reference No. 6 of 2011, decided on 18th June, 2015.DATE of hearing: 16th March, 2015
ATHAR MINALLAH AND AAMER FAROOQ, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Ishaq Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Siddiqui and Mian Abdul Rauf, Advocate-General, Islamabad for
Respondent.
Murder Reference No. 6 of 2011, decided on 18th June, 2015.DATE of hearing: 16th March, 2015
ATHAR MINALLAH AND AAMER FAROOQ, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Ishaq Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Siddiqui and Mian Abdul Rauf, Advocate-General, Islamabad for
Respondent.
The STATEVSMUHAMMAD ABBASI and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---FIR was registered promptly---Motive alleged was previous enmity---Firing at the deceased by accused and others, on the roof of under-construction building owned by accused, had been testified by the prosecution witnesses---Said witnesses, along with the complainant after witnessing the incident, had promptly proceeded to the Police Station---Testimony of the widow of the deceased, was credible, and despite being subjected to extensive cross-examination, same could not be shattered---Alleged contradictions in her statement, were not material enough to discredit her statement---Evidence of widow was further corroborated by other prosecution witnesses---Prosecution witnesses were not chance witnesses and had deposed consistently and the suggestion by the defence of false implication of accused was not supported by any thing on record---Testimony of the witnesses to the extent of accused, was sufficiently corroborated through strong evidence---Deceased was established to be not armed---Injuries, allegedly inflicted on the body of accused, remained doubtful and nothing could be placed on record to corroborate the version of accused of being attacked by the deceased---Medical evidence and recoveries collected from the place of occurrence, had established that more than one weapon was used qua the injuries of the deceased---Nothing was on record to corroborate the version taken by accused in his statement recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C.---Medical report sufficiently established the case in favour of the prosecution demolishing the version taken by accused---Prosecution, through credible and confidence inspiring evidence, had established its case beyond reasonable doubt---Conviction and sentence awarded to accused by the Trial Court, were confirmed; and Murder Reference was answered in the affirmative and appeal of accused was dismissed---Nothing having been pointed out from the record to interfere with the acquittal of co-accused, appeal against acquittal of co-accused, was also dismissed, in circumstances. Noor Ellahi v. The State PLD 1966 SC 708;…