| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2508 2016 SLD 2508 2016 PCRLJ 1832 |
Criminal Appeals Nos. 351, 326 of 2009 and Murder Reference No.89/RWP of 2009, heard on 12-10-2015, hearing DATE : 12-10-2015.
SYED SHAHBAZ ALI RIZVI AND RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Illyas Siddiqui for Appellants. Nemo for the Complainant.
MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR AND others.
VS
THE STATE AND others.
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.--- ---.---Ss. 302(b), 201, 364 & 34---.---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.72---.---Qatl-i-amd, causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---.---Appreciation of evidence---.---Benefit of doubt---.---Prosecution's own case was that there was no eye-witness of the occurrence; and the case was based upon circumstantial evidence---.---Neither last seen evidence, nor evidence of wajtakkar was on record---.---Incident was a blind murder---.---Prosecution could not bring on record the mode and place of murder---.---Only incriminating evidence against accused was, e-mail record and recovery of dead body from a Baithak---.---E-mail, did not bear the names of accused persons on it, and same was not even produced in the court according to law to meet the requirements of Art.72 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---.---Attested copies being not available, same were not exhibited before the court during the trial---.---E-mails relied by the prosecution, were not corroborated by any other confidence inspiring evidence---.---Prosecution had failed to prove that the Baithak where the occurrence took place was in exclusive possession of accused---.---Cause of death, was also shrouded in mystery---.---No further evidence had been led by the prosecution to make accused responsible for the recovery of the dead body in disfigured and swollen condition---.---Joint pointation was inadmissible evidence---.---No direct evidence of murder being available on file, prosecution was under burden to prove all links making out one straight chain, but same was not found in the case---.---Conviction and sentence of accused were not sustainable---.--- Prosecution having not been able to discharge its onus to prove the guilt of accused satisfactorily beyond shadow of any reasonable doubt, impugned of the Trial Court was set aside extending benefit of doubt to accused; and he was acquitted from the charge and was released, in circumstances. Imran v. The State 2015 SCMR 155 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.--- ---.---S. 302(b)---.---Appreciation of…
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