Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2108 2017 SLD 2108 2017 YLR 375
Lahore High Court
Cr. A. No. 535 and Murder Reference No. 103 of 2011, hearing Date : 12-11-2015.
SYED SHAHBAZ ALI RIZVI, JUSTICE, RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Fakhar Hayat Awan for Appellant. Muhammad Waqas Anwar, Deputy Prosecutor General and Karamat, S.I. for the State. Ch. Salim ul Haq for the Complainant.

AQEEL ALIAS MUNDRI

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Inordinate delay in reporting the matter, remained unexplained; and it could be inferred that incident was not witnessed by the complainant and prosecution witness---Post-mortem report, was prepared with ante timing---Both, the complainant and prosecution witness, were not only related to the deceased, but had inimical background with accused party---No reason for being present at the scene of occurrence was given by the eye-witnesses during the investigation---Person in whose shop occurrence took place, being the owner of said shop, was a natural and material witness, but the prosecution had intentionally and dishonestly withheld evidence of such natural witness---Prosecution story, narrated by the complainant and prosecution witness, regarding actual occurrence, was doubtful and untrustworthy---Medical evidence, was also not in consonance with the ocular account, but was inconsistent with the ocular account---Actual motive of the incident remained shrouded in mystery---Negative report of Forensic Science Laboratory, having not been proved by the prosecution in evidence, evidence of alleged recovery of crime weapon, could not be used against accused---Accused in his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C., had stated, that he absconded due to his false implication in the case which was quite probable in the prevailing socio-cultural background of the area---Co-accused persons, had already been acquitted, and no appeal against their acquittal had been filed, either by the complainant or the State---Present case was replete with the circumstances, which had created serious doubts about the prosecution story---Prosecution having failed to prove its case against accused beyond shadow of reasonable doubt, conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court against accused, were set aside, he was acquitted of the charge, extending him benefit of doubt, and was released, in circumstances. Muhammad Riaz v. The State 2009 PCr.LJ 1022; Irshad Ahmed v. The State 2011 SCMR 1190; Khalid alias Khalidi and 2 others v. The State 2012 SCMR 327 and Mehmood Ahmad and 2 others v.…
🔒
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