| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 220 2018 SLD 220 2018 PCRLJ 156 |
Cr.A. No. 1616 of 2010, decision & hearing Date : 22-11-2016
Hafiz Ghulam Shabbir assisted by Sher Afgan Asadi for Appellants. Rana Tassawar Ali Khan, Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab for the State.
MUHAMMAD SUFYAN AND 2 OTHERS
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section: 302,324,148,149
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Motive not proved---Prosecution case was that accused party had attacked upon the complainant party, murdered the deceased and injured the complainant---Complainant/injured witness had explained the motive by stating that a shop, which was their property, in respect whereof, they had instituted a suit and obtained a stay order in their favour, was the reason of the offence---No documentary evidence with regard to the shop could be produced by the complainant party nor they could establish their possession of the shop in question---Defence consistently rebutted the said stance of the complainant side by maintaining that disputed shop was in possession of acquitted accused and his son, wherein they traded being owner thereof---Defence tendered documentary evidence in support of their contention---Trial court also observed in its that accused party was in possession of the said shop on the day of alleged occurrence---Circumstances established that prosecution had not succeeded in proving that particular aspect of the case, hence motive had certainly gone un-established. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account corroborated by medical evidence---Prosecution case was that accused armed with deadly weapons assaulted on complainant party, as a result of which, one person of complainant party died and three were injured---Ocular account was furnished by eyewitnesses comprising of complainant and injured---Presence of said witnesses at the spot could not be doubted as the accused side admitted their presence at the hot-spot---Said witnesses had categorically alleged in their statements that accused-appellant gave a churri blow at the left armpit and co-accused-appellant clubbed his dagger into the abdomen of deceased---Said fact was corroborated by the postmortem report of the deceased---Medical Officer, who examined the…
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