Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 1375 2017 SLD 1375 2017 SCMR 486
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 2012, decision Date : 18-01-2017. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 12.3.2010 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. A. No. 174-J/2004 and M.R. 639/2004)
DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE, QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUHAMMAD ASIF

VS

THE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 161

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S.302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of witnesses---Interested and related witnesses---Doubt in recovery of weapon---Father and mother of deceased alleged that their deceased son went outside the house with the accused and co-accused; that they followed their son and saw the accused and co-accused persons murder their son with a dagger---No convincing and plausible reason had been advanced as to why the parents followed their deceased son and what was the object behind it---Conduct of both said alleged eye-witnesses ran counter to normal human behaviour---Two independent witnesses who were close friends of the deceased and were on frequent visiting terms were not produced at the trial as witnesses in such way, the best evidence, independent in nature, was withheld from the court, which was sufficient to discard the evidence of the deceased's parents, who were interested and related witnesses---Site plan, which was never denied by the prosecution, showed that the distance between the deceased and the accused was twenty feet---Question was as to how in a dark night, the witnesses were able to identify the accused and the dagger in his hand from such a distance---Autopsy report/medical evidence did not support the time of death of deceased as claimed by the prosecution---Motive set up was not only weak and feeble but also not established because the daughter of the complainant in whose presence the alleged quarrel with accused party took place prior to the murder, was not produced at trial---No evidence has been brought on record to establish that the shop, wherefrom dagger belonging to accused was recovered, was in an exclusive possession and ownership of the accused---Conviction and sentence of accused for murder was set aside in circumstances---Appeal was allowed accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Evidence of prosecution witnesses, reliance upon---Scope---Once prosecution witnesses were disbelieved with respect to a co-accused then, they could not be relied upon with regard to the other accused unless they were corroborated by…
🔒
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