Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2094 2017 SLD 2094 2017 YLR 320
Lahore High Court
Cr. A.s Nos. 1646, 2214 and Murder Reference No. 564 of 2010, decision & hearing Dated: 25-1-2016.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE, CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD, JUSTICE
Mudasar Naveed Chatha and Syed Muhammad Farhad Tirmzi for Appellant. Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari for the Complainant. Malik Muhammad Jaffar, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.

HAFEEZ ULLAH AND OTHERS

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss.302(b), 324, 337-F(iii) & 337-F(vi)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, Ghayr-jaifah mutalahimah and Ghayr-jaifah munaqqilah---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Previous enmity---Delay in autopsy---Previous enmity was a common ground and corroboration was rule of prudence and not that of law---Corroboration was imperative where witnesses, seemingly had an axe to grind---In absence of independent corroboration, it would be unsafe to rely upon an improved version of witnesses introduced for first time during trial---Improvements were so huge that they tend to change entire complexion of occurrence and therefore, could not be described merely as explanatory--- Improvements were ludicrous to say the least as it was not possible for human eye to capture entry, exit and re-entry of a bullet that too inside the car in darkness---Once a witness was found to have a capacity and tendency to exaggerate, his testimony warranted stringent scrutiny particular in the case with the history of previous enmity---Delay between occurrence and autopsy admitted a reasonable possibility that FIR was not recorded at a point of time mentioned therein--- All such circumstances cumulatively cast a shadow of doubt on prosecution story regarding accused and it was unsafe to maintain the conviction---High Court extended benefit of doubt to accused and acquitted him of the charge. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE:---.--- Hafeezullah son of Ahmad Hayat, appellant herein, is in receipt of a guilty verdict, returned to him vide impugned judgment dated 24-6-2010 by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Chiniot; he was tried along with Saleemullah, Ahmad Hayat and Umar Hayat. Ahmad Hayat died during the trial whereas Saleemullah and Umar Hayat stand acquitted. In the wake of his conviction under Sections 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 337-F(vi) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 with sentence of death along with payment of compensation in the sum of Rs.500,000/- or to undergo six months SI in the event of default, seven years R.I. with fine of Rs.50,000/- or six months SI in default payment thereof, three years R.I. with…
🔒
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