Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 500 2017 SLD 500 2017 PCRLJ 197
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1480, Criminal Revision No. 845 andMurder Reference No. 312 of 2013, heard on 9th November,2016
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Sardar Khurram Latif Khan Khosa for Appellant No.2.Hassan Iftikhar and Malik Muhammad Shahzad Awan for Appellant No.1.Munir Ahmad Sial, DPG for the State.

NAJAF ALIAS NAJJI AND ANOTHER --AppellantSVSTHE STATE AND ANOTHER --RespondentS

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Allegation against the accused was that he committed murder of the son of complainant---Prosecution produced two eye-witnesses to prove the occurrence---Occurrence took place in the field outside the abadi of the village in the dark hours of the night---Complainant did not mention the source of light in the crime report nor the prosecution witnesses had started in that regard---Prosecution witnesses allegedly had seen the occurrence from a distance of one acre---Identity of accused in the dark hours of the night was not free from doubt---If the intention of accused was to bring the deceased to the place of incident for the commission of crime, they would have not waited for prosecution eye-witnesses to witness the occurrence---Attending circumstances had created doubt about the veracity of the prosecution story, benefit of which resolved in favour of accused---Appeal was allowed in circumstances and accused were acquitted by setting aside the conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court. Muhammad Naeem Inayat v. The State 2010 SCMR 1054 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Statement of victim recorded by Investigating Officer--- Evidentiary value---Allegation against the accused was that he committed murder of the son of complainant---Investigating Officer had allegedly recorded the statement of victim in the hospital after getting permission from the medical officer---Prosecution did not produce any document showing that the said medical officer had opined that victim was capable to record his statement---Statement of victim was not endorsed or attested by the Medical Officer---Such circumstances had suggested that victim was not in a position to make statement in injured condition---Such statement was not reliable rather created doubt about the veracity of prosecution version---Appeal was allowed in circumstances and accused were acquitted by setting aside the conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register