Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2075 2017 SLD 2075 2017 YLR 705
Lahore High Court
Cr.A. No. 864 and Criminal Revision No. 800 of 2013, hearing Date : 11-06-2015.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE
Shahid Nawaz Langrial and Mian Muhammad Ramzan for Appellant. Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State. Usman Naseem for the Complainant.

MST. GULZARAN BIBI ALIAS SHAMA

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Unexplained delay in making arrest---Effect---Delay in post-mortem---Effect---Extra judicial confession---Scope---Benefit of doubt---Motive, absence of---Relevance---Accused was alleged to have murdered her husband by pressing pillow against his face after intoxicating---Trial Court convicted accused under S. 302(b), P.P.C. for qatl-i-amd and sentenced her to undergo life imprisonment and also ordered her to pay compensation to legal heirs of deceased under S. 544-A, Cr.P.C.---Complainant also filed revision for enhancement of sentence of accused from life imprisonment to death---Validity---Examination of dead body, as per statement of medical witness, was conducted with delay of fourteen hours, which showed that occurrence had not taken place at the time mentioned in FIR---FIR had been registered after due deliberations and consultations---No one had, admittedly, seen accused administering intoxicant to deceased or suffocating him with pillow at time of alleged occurrence---Murder of complainant's son was unseen, and case had been registered against accused on mere apprehension of complainant that accused along with unknown persons had murdered his son---No said unknown persons could be produced to support prosecution story---Complainant, who lived thirty kilometers away from place of occurrence, could not give any reason for his presence along with his brother at place and time of occurrence---Complainant's assertion that accused having murdered his son (her husband), remained there right after committing murder, when complainant along with his brother was also present at place of occurrence, did not appeal to prudent mind---Accused was not arrested right after making extra-judicial confession---Accused was arrested after six days of alleged occurrence---Delay in effecting arrest of accused remained unexplained---Another woman was also alleged to have been present at the time of alleged occurrence, but neither she was joined in investigation nor was she produced before Trial Court, and her absence cast doubt in prosecution story---No occasion existed for accused to make…
🔒
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