Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 453 2015 SLD 453 2015 PCRLJ 169
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 502 of 2011, decided on 8th October, 2012
MRS. IRSHAD QAISER, J
Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Malik for Appellant. Fazal Rehman, A.A.G. for the State. Khizar Hayat Khazana for the Complainant

GHAFFAR ALI

VS

The STATE and another

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 324,337-A(iii)

(a) Criminal trial--- ----Conviction--- Basis of--- Conviction must be based on unimpeachable evidence and certainty of guilt; and any doubt arising in the prosecution case, must be awarded in the account of accused. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 324 & 337-A(iii)---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing Shajjah-i-Hashimah--- Appreciation of evidence--- Report of Investigating Officer and the medical report contradicted each other---Stamp of injuries on the person of victim, could prove his presence on the spot, but those injuries, in no way, would certify that whatsoever was stated by him or his companion, was the whole truth---Statements of prosecution witnesses, did not tally with the assertion of the F.I.R.---Complainant could not authenticate his presence at the time of occurrence---Complainant admitted blood feud of his family with others in the locality, which militated against the prosecution case; and cast thick cloud of doubt over the assertion made by him in his statement and in the F.I.R.---Facts had revealed that no blood feud existed between the parties; and there was no motive for accused to commit the offence---Statement of prosecution witness being full of afterthought and improvements, had led to the inference that he was not present on the scene of occurrence---Occurrence had not taken place in the manner as described in the murasila and F.I.R.---No recovery or discovery had been effected---Abscondence of accused, would do little to properly medicate the flaws in the prosecution evidence, when it was found to be discrepant---Accused had been convicted and sentenced under S.337-A(iii), P.P.C. by the Trial Court, but no charge had been framed in that behalf---Conviction and sentence under S.337-A(iii), P.P.C., could not be sustained under any canons of law---Case suffered with manipulations and distortion from the very start---Charge against accused could not be held to have been proved beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt and it would not be in accord with safe administration of justice to maintain conviction of accused on that quality and quantity of evidence---Convictions and sentences recorded by the Trial Court, were set aside…
🔒
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