Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 2641 2016 SLD 2641 2016 PCRLJ 18
Lahore High Court
Crl. Appeal No. 274-J of 2011, heard on 25th May, 2015.
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, CHIEF, JUSTICE

MUHAMMAD JAVAID - --AppellantVSTHE STATE - --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) --------- ----------S. 302(b) --------- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 510 --------- Qatl-i-amd --------- Appreciation of evidence --------- Benefit of doubt --------- Delay in registration of FIR --------- Motive, absence of --------- Chemical Examiner and Serologist report --------- Scope --------- Matter was reported to police through statement made by complainant/brother of deceased on the same day 2-3/4 hours after the occurrence whereas distance between place of occurrence and police station was about seven kilometers --------- Case of prosecution in FIR and before the Trial Court was that three persons were present at the spot at the time of occurrence but they did not bother to report the matter to police soon after the incident --------- Such delay in reporting matter to police could not be explained at trial which cast doubt on veracity of prosecution case --------- Motive was not alleged against accused in FIR and before the Trial Court rather the same was attributed to a female co-accused who was tried separately and had been acquitted by Trial Court --------- Motive alleged by prosecution did not connect accused with commission of crime --------- Occurrence took place on 14-9-2006, accused was arrested on 24-9-2006, who got recovered hatchet on 24-9-2006, whereas the same was received in office of Chemical Examiner on 10-10-2006 i.e. about twenty six days after the occurrence --------- Blood on hatchet would disintegrate during such period --------- High Court declined to rely on recovery of hatchet and positive report of Chemical Examiner and Serologist --------- Prosecution failed to connect accused with commission of crime beyond any shadow of doubt --------- High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused by Trial Court and acquitted him of the charge --------- Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Ashiq Hussain v. State PLD 1994 SC 879; Amin Ali v. The State 2011 SCMR 323 and Muhammad Jamil v. Muhammad Akram and others 2009 SCMR 120 ref. Ayub Masih v. The State PLD 2002 SC 1048 fol. (b) Criminal trial --------- ----------Evidence --------- Medical evidence --------- Scope --------- Medical…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register