Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 2519 2016 SLD 2519 2016 PCRLJ 1848
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1227 of 2012, heard on 4-05-2016, hearing DATE : 4-05-2016.
ERUM SAJAD GULL, JUSTICE
Muhammad Akmal Saleemi for Appellant. Nadeem Muhammad Akram for the Complainant. Iftikhar-ul-Haq Chaudhary, Additional Prosecutor-General for the State.

MUHAMMAD AZAM.

VS

THE STATE AND another.

Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.--- ---.---S. 376---.---Rape---.---Appreciation of evidence---.---Consent of a minor victim---.---Scope---.---Violence marks, absence of---.---Effect---.---Occurrence had taken place in the intervening night, and the FIR of the case had been lodged on the very next day at 02:30 p.m.---.---Police station was five kilometer away, thus the FIR could be said have been recorded promptly---.---Delay in registration of FIR was not fatal in such cases---.---Victim, a minor, had categorically stated that the accused had raped her, while the co-accused was standing nearby threatening her---.---Eye-witnesses, victim's father and cousin, had corroborated her statement---.---Reason as to why the victim had gone out of her house in the middle of the night was to ease herself which was a natural phenomenon in villages, and when the wife of the complainant woke up and found the victim missing, she woke up the complainant, who with his relatives went searching for the victim---.---Investigating Officer although had stated that there was a bathroom in the house of the complainant and there was no reason why the victim should have gone out of her house to ease herself, but the Investigating Officer had failed to produce site plan of the house of the complainant to prove his statement---.---Bald statement of the Investigating Officer could not be relied upon, and the Ipse dixit of the police, even otherwise, was not binding on the Court---.---Medical examiner had categorically stated that the victim had been raped---.---Doctor had further stated that it was not necessary that on tearing of the hymen there was bleeding, and that no marks of violence had been found on the body of the victim---.---Rape, having been proved by cogent and concrete evidence, including medical evidence, absence of marks of violence on the body of the victim would not negate the prosecution case and conviction could have been awarded on the solitary statement of the prosecution alone---.---Accused, after medically examination, had been declared fit---.---According to the DNA test report, the specimen taken from the victim had matched with that of the accused---.---Statement of…
🔒
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