Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 44 2015 SLD 44 2015 PLD 65
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 79-B of 2013, decided on 18th July, 2013. DATE of hearing 18th July, 2013
ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, J
Mir Zali Khan and Muhammad Haroon for Appellant. Faridullah Khan, D.A.G. for the State. Khush Amir Khattak for the Complainant

MUHAMMAD SAEED

VS

THE STATE and another

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 496-A,496-B

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 18

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342

(a) Criminal trial--- ----Conviction, recording of---Conviction could not be recorded on the basis of mere presumptions, but strong evidence of unimpeachable character was the criteria for curtailing the liberty of accused---Prosecution was duty bound to prove its case through cogent, coherent, and evidence of unimpeachable character beyond a reasonable doubt; and it could not take benefit of the weaknesses of the defence. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----Ss. 496-A & 496-B---Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a woman---Commission of zina---Appreciation of evidence---Complainant had not charged any body by name and had not levelled any allegation of abduction/enticing or zina even against the unknown culprits---Complainant had charged accused and acquitted co-accused in supplementary statement---No ocular account was available to prove the enticing away of alleged abductee and thereafter committing zina with her by accused---Woman Medical Officer, who examined alleged victim, did not find any sign of violence on her body, and also no scratches, bruises or abrasions, were seen on body of the alleged victim---On pre-vaginal examination V/VOS, were found closed, and A/V was normal in size---Pregnancy test was done and found negative---No evidence, either ocular or circumstantial could be brought on record to prove the commission of zina by accused and there was no evidence to prove abduction/enticing away of the victim---Co-accused being father-in-law of accused, it was not appealable to reason that father-in-law would help to bring a married lady to the house of his son-in-law for marriage purpose, as co-wife of his daughter to devastate the life of his own daughter---Involvement of acquitted co-accused, prima facie was sufficient to falsify the prosecution story---Statement of lady accused about commission of illegal intercourse, had been contradicted and quashed by her medical report and statement of lady doctor which by no way would be helpful to prosecution, when otherwise, the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of accused through cogent and trustworthy evidence---Findings rendered by the Trial Court, in circumstances were…
🔒
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