Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 2952 2016 SLD 2952 2016 YLR 2611

Crl. Appeal No. 1119 of 2010, decided on 30th September, 2015. DATE of hearing: 30th September, 2015.
ASLAM, JAVED MINHAS, JUSTICE
Tahir Mehmood for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Akbar, DPG for the State.

PERVAIZ MASEEH

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.--- ---.---S. 302(b)---.---Qatl-i-amd---.---Appreciation of evidence---.---Benefit of doubt---.---Complainant was not the eye-witness of the occurrence, and he came to know the occurrence through telephone that his sister had been murdered---.---Two prosecution witnesses who were never produced by the prosecution during the trial, were given up as being won-over---.---Two other persons introduced as witnesses, were closely related inter se and were also close relatives of the deceased---.---Said introduced witnesses, who were permanent residents of a chak which was 30 Kilometers away from the place of occurrence, were chance witnesses, and they could not disclose any reason for their presence in the area where alleged occurrence had taken place---.---No person of the locality appeared before the Police, as well as the court of law to strengthen the story of the prosecution---.---Iron-blow pipe/alleged weapon of offence, was not stained with blood---.---Incident was an unseen occurrence---.---Contradictions existed with regard to time of death of the deceased and postmortem report---.---Motive was not established through any cogent and reasonable evidence---.---Delay of more than seven hours in registration of FIR, being unexplained, it could be inferred that case was registered with deliberation and consultation---.---Contradictions between the Investigating officer and postmortem examination report with regard to number of injuries on the person of the deceased were noticed---.---Occurrence took place at 3.00 am. at odd hours of the night; source of light was not taken into possession---.---Trial Court, in circumstances, was not justified to hold that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt---.---Impugned passed by the Trial Court was set aside, accused was acquitted of the charge, and he being on bail, his bail bonds were discharged, in circumstances. Mst. Shazia Parveen v. The State 2014 SCMR 1197 and Mst. Shamshad v. The State 1998 SCMR 854 ref. (b) Criminal trial---.--- ---.---Benefit of doubt---.---If a single circumstance would create reasonable doubt in a prudent mind,…
🔒
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