Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2314 2017 SLD 2314 2017 MLD 745
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 763 of 2010, heard on 14-10-2015.
FARRUKH GULZAR AWAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Usman Sharif Khosa for Appellant. Abdul Qayum, A.P.G. for the State. Jamil Hussain Nutkani for the Complainant.

MUKHTIAR HUSSAIN

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) & 337-F(vi)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 340(2)--- Qatl-i-amd, causing Munaqqilah--- Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Complainant, had made improvements with regard to time of occurrence and failed to tell the exact date, time, month as well as year of occurrence---Deposition of Medical Expert, suffered from dishonest/material improvements---Stance of the defence, found support even from the FIR---Defence plea, though could not be relied upon to discard the eye-witness account, as accused opted not to appear in his defence under S.340(2), Cr.P.C., nor produced any evidence in support of his contention, but same was very much relevant when the same found support from other circumstantial evidence, produced by the prosecution---Motive set up by the prosecution, had been attributed to acquitted co-accused---Improved deposition of both the eye-witnesses, were duly confronted during trial with regard to time of occurrence, role of co-accused (since acquitted)---When a witness improved version, the improved statement subsequently made, could not be relied upon, and its credibility would become doubtful---Complainant had not challenged the acquittal of co-accused, who was acquitted on merits on the basis of same set of witnesses by giving him benefit of doubt by the Trial Court---Benefit of principle of rule of consistency should be given to accused---Prosecution, having failed to prove its case against accused beyond reasonable doubt, conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court against accused, vide impugned were set aside, and he was acquitted of the charge; and he being on bail, his bail bond as well as sureties stood discharged from the liability, in circumstances. Akhtar Ali and others v. The State 2008 SCMR 6 and Farman Ahmed v. Muhammad Inayat and others 2007 SCMR 1825 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Medical evidence, scope---Deposition of medical expert, was supportive piece of evidence which was relevant, when same would find support from strong and un-shattered deposition of eye-witnesses---Medical evidence could confirm only the receipt of…
🔒
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