| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 3011 2018 SLD 3011 2018 YLR 1 |
Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2012, Criminal Appeal No. 2187 of 2015, Criminal Revision No. 187 and Murder Reference No. 28 of 2012, heard on 01-03-2017.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE SARDAR AHMAD NAEEM, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Barrister Salman Safdar
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Waqas Anwar, Deputy Prosecutor General, Dr. A. Basit
MUHAMMAD ABBAS AND ANOTHER
VS
THE STATE AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section: 34,302(b),324,337-F(ii)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(ii) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing badiah, common intention---Prompt lodging of FIR---Scope---Occurrence had taken place at 10.30 am and was reported to the police on the same day at 12.30 noon---First Information Report had been lodged with sufficient promptitude and the said fact ousted any possibility of deliberation or consultation of the matter by the complainant with any legal expert to falsely involve the accused persons. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(ii) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing badiah, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Allegations against accused persons were that they assaulted upon complainant party, made firing with pistol .30-bore, due to which, husband of complainant died and her minor son was injured---Ocular account was furnished by three eye-witnesses including complainant and minor injured---All the three eye-witnesses had nominated the three accused in FIR as well as in their statements before the police and they had assigned them specific role to the accused persons---Said witnesses had categorically explained the seat of injuries specifying the weapon of offence used by the accused during incident---All the eye-witnesses had explained each and every segment of occurrence in their statement before the Trial Court---Witnesses had explained the mode and manner in which the occurrence had taken place---Said witnesses gave reasons for their presence at the place of occurrence---Witnesses remained consistent with each other on each and every material point---Said witnesses had sufficiently proved their presence at the place of occurrence at relevant time and witnessing the occurrence---Circumstances of the case showed that parties were previously known to each other being residents of the same locality, therefore there was no chance of mistaken identity or substitution---Eye-witnesses were natural witnesses whose presence at the spot could not be discarded in absence of any solid reason---Place of occurrence,…
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