Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Mitigating circumstances---Matter was reported with the Police within 3 and half hours of the incident---Such time could not be taken as a "delay", with a view to allow deliberation and consultation on the part of the complainant party, particularly when it was claimed by the complainant party that they first tried to carry the deceased to hospital---Witnesses, strongly remained sticking with the version/stand of the F.I.R., wherein only accused were named---Said witnesses strongly stuck regarding every-minute-details given in the F.I.R.---Reference to acquittal of co-accused alone could not be taken sufficient to disbelieve the evidence of witnesses, particularly, when the principle of 'safe criminal administration of justice', nowhere insisted that mere acquittal of one or more accused, should result in acquittal of all, simple reason being that principle of "falsus in uno falsus in omnibus" was not applicable---Out of two brothers, one brother was examined by the prosecution as prosecution witness, while the other brother was given up---No substance was found in the defence plea that by giving up other brother should result in drawing an adverse inference against the prosecution---Incident being a night time occurrence, torch light was claimed by prosecution as one of the source of light at the time of witnessing the incident---F.I.R. would show that the complainant had claimed therein that he saw the incident under moon light and torch light---Torch light was not claimed as sole source of light---Torch light, in itself was not a direct piece of evidence, but it could, at the best, provide a corroboration to claim of identification of accused, or could lead to an otherwise view---Mere non-production of the torch light, could not adversely affect the evidence of witnesses---Presence of witnesses was admitted by the defence---Said witnesses remained unwavering with each other in respect of all material aspects---Witnesses had also given conforming details of the weapons with which accused were armed and defence had not challenged any of the claim of…