| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3093 2016 SLD 3093 2016 MLD 757 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 277-P of 2012, decided on 9th April, 2015. Date of hearing: 9th April, 2015.
QAISER RASHID KHAN, JUSTICE AND ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, JUSTICE
Jalal ud Din Akbar Azam Gara for Appellant. Muhammad Amin Khattak Lachi for
Respondent No. 1. Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah, A.A.G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 277-P of 2012, decided on 9th April, 2015. Date of hearing: 9th April, 2015.
QAISER RASHID KHAN, JUSTICE AND ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, JUSTICE
Jalal ud Din Akbar Azam Gara for Appellant. Muhammad Amin Khattak Lachi for
Respondent No. 1. Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah, A.A.G. for the State.
MUHAMMAD NOOR - --Appellant
VS
RIAZ SHAH and another - --Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) --------- ----------Ss. 302(b) & 324 --------- Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd --------- Appreciation of evidence --------- Benefit of doubt --------- Explanation given qua three hours delay in reporting the incident to Police, did not appeal to a prudent mind --------- Time of three hours had been consumed in deliberation and consultation to charge accused --------- Oral altercation between the parties prior to incident, remained unproved --------- No evidence had been led to prove as to where and in whose presence said altercation took place; and what was the bone of contention of said altercation --------- Where the motive would remain unproved, then the ocular account would be considered with great care and caution --------- Complainant, who appeared as solitary witness, was first cousin of the deceased --------- Conviction could be recorded on the basis of solitary statement of a witness having close relation with the deceased or victim, provided same was trustworthy, confidence inspiring and corroborated by strong circumstances of the case --------- Eye-witness, who claimed his presence at the spot, to make his testimony believable and reliable, must satisfy the mind of the court through some physical circumstances or through some corroborative evidence about his presence at the spot --------- Serious doubts existed about the presence of the complainant on the spot with the deceased at the time of incident --------- Complainant had been shown in the site plan in close proximity of 5 paces from the deceased --------- Accused persons had been attributed the role of firing at the deceased and the complainant with automatic weapons i.e. Kalashnikov --------- Complainant's case was not that he was not fired at by accused, but he charged accused for attempting at his life, in such circumstances much damage should have been caused to the complainant --------- Escape or let off the complainant by assailant, had created serious doubts about his presence on the spot with the deceased at the time of incident --------- Testimony of the complainant, which otherwise suffered from contradictions and discrepancies, had wrongly…
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