| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 2982 2018 SLD 2982 2018 PCRLJ 180 |
Criminal Appeals Nos. 5-I, 7-I, 16-I, Jail Appeals Nos. 10-I and 27-I of 2017, decision Dated: 24-04-2018. hearing Dated:16-04-2018.
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, JUSTICE SHAUKAT ALI RAKHSHANI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Shaibar Khan (in Appeal No. 5-I of 2017). Malik Ghulam Mustafa Kandwal (in Appeal No. 7-I of 2017). Tariq Khushnood Qureshi (in Jail Appeal No. 10-I of 2017). Muhammad Shoaib Abbasi (in Appeal No. 16-I of 2017). Malik Shakeel-ur-Rehman (in Jail Appeal No. 27-I of 2017). Hafiz Fazal Rahim
Respondent(s) by: Malik Akhtar Hussain Awan, Assistant Advocate-General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
ASHFAQ AND OTHERS
VS
MST. KALSOOM BIBI AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 396,412
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 164
Law: Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
Section: 17(4)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 396 & 412---Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17(4)---Dacoity with murder, dishonestly receiving property stolen in commission of dacoity, haraabah---Case having been registered against unknown persons was not a case of direct evidence---Case of prosecution rested on the circumstantial evidence---Important evidence produced by the prosecution was confessional statements of all accused persons, except one---Such confession should have been made voluntarily, based on true account of facts and had to be proved at the trial---Confessional statements of accused persons were inconsistent with reference to number of shots fired by some of accused persons---Confessional statement of one of accused persons cast doubt about the truthfulness of story disclosed by others and appeared to be untrue---Memorandums of inquiry revealed that confessions were recorded after about 5 days---Such confessional statements could not be believed, relied upon and acted upon in order to establish their culpability---Evidence of recovery of empties and pistols witnessed through recovery memos and report of Forensic Science Laboratory, though positive, would not furnish corroboration to the evidence of confession, which even otherwise had been ruled out from consideration---Case of prosecution was that of fabrication and conscious attempt to create evidence---Possibility of fabrication could not be ruled out in view of dates of recovery and transmission to the Laboratory---Report of Chemical Examiner, suggesting human blood on the clothes of deceased, by itself would not be sufficient to prove the case of prosecution---Whole evidence produced by the prosecution was not worthy of credit and did not inspire confidence; it appeared to have been coined---Prosecution had failed to prove its case against all accused persons beyond shadow of doubt---Benefit of doubt had to be extended to accused persons as a legal compulsion---Impugned of conviction and sentence of accused persons, was set aside---Accused persons were acquitted and released forthwith, in circumstances. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Circumstantial…
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