| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2761 2017 SLD 2761 2017 PCRLJ 1591 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1162 of 2010 and Murder Reference No. 20of 2011, decision & hearing Dated: 11-04-2017.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Syed Badar Raza Gillani, Malik Muhammad Hashim
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Ali Shahab
Criminal Appeal No. 1162 of 2010 and Murder Reference No. 20of 2011, decision & hearing Dated: 11-04-2017.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Syed Badar Raza Gillani, Malik Muhammad Hashim
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Ali Shahab
MST. AMIRAN AND OTHERSVSTHE STATE AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,109,302
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 374,376
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 302, 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused was alleged to have slaughtered the deceased/brother of complainant through churri with the help of co-accused---Motive behind the occurrence was stated to be the illicit relations of accused with the daughter of deceased---Ocular account was furnished by the witnesses including complainant---Said showed that the alleged eye-witnesses were not in best of terms with the deceased as well as with the co-accused/wife of the deceased---Eye-witnesses had alleged that they were present outside the house of deceased at the time of occurrence but none of the eye-witnesses advanced any reasoning for their presence there and that too at the odd hours of the night---Such aspect coupled with the fact that the said witnesses were not in good terms with the deceased, made their presence outside the house of the deceased, dubious in nature---Court witness tried to supplement the ocular account furnished by eye-witnesses but the actual position was altogether different---Admittedly, court witness was inmate of the house where the occurrence took place, but she deposed that though she witnessed the occurrence but at the arrival of the police, she was locked in a room and was not permitted to interact either with the police or with the witnesses---Investigating Officer stated that he recorded the statement of court witness on the first day of the occurrence---Investigating Officer deposed that remaining witnesses had joined the investigation process and stated nothing about the involvement of the accused in the commission of crime---Record showed that co-accused/wife of the deceased had blamed that the nephews of the complainant had committed the murder of her husband; later on, after twenty five days of the occurrence, complainant/real brother of deceased moved application alleging therein that deceased was done to death by the accused persons---Complainant had claimed that occurrence was witnessed by him and his brothers---Nephews of complainant joined the investigation proceedings and were found innocent---Investigating…