| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 70 2017 SLD 70 2017 SCMR 596 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 324 and 325 of 2011, decision & hearing Date : 25-01-2017 (On appeal from the judgment Dated 17.6.2010 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Crl. A. No. 2124 of 2005, Crl. Rev. No. 150 of 2005 and M. R. No. 107 of 2005)
DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE, QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE
Ansar Nawaz Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in Crl. A. 324 of 2011). Allah Bakhsh Gondal, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 (in Crl. A. 324 of 2011). Ch. Zubair Ah
Criminal Appeals Nos. 324 and 325 of 2011, decision & hearing Date : 25-01-2017 (On appeal from the judgment Dated 17.6.2010 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Crl. A. No. 2124 of 2005, Crl. Rev. No. 150 of 2005 and M. R. No. 107 of 2005)
DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE, QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE
Ansar Nawaz Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in Crl. A. 324 of 2011). Allah Bakhsh Gondal, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 (in Crl. A. 324 of 2011). Ch. Zubair Ah
MST. RUKHSANA BEGUM AND OTHERS
VS
SAJJAD AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 148,149,302(b)
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 342,382-B
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 129
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Time of occurrence shown in the FIR was 11.00 a.m., and inquest report showed time of death of deceased persons as 12:40 p.m., which created doubt as the occurrence only lasted for a few minutes---No crime empty had been shown in the inquest report, but in the recovery memo and in the site-plan, these empties had been shown lying very close to the deceased persons---Site plan showed that, the complainant party had no land near or around the crime spot and even the cattle-shed where they were allegedly sitting, belonged to some other person, therefore, claim of complainant that they took a round of their crop prior to the occurrence, stood falsified---One of the alleged eye-witness of the occurrence belonged to another village, and he did not provide any reason or definite purpose for visiting the crime spot, therefore, he was either not present at the crime scene or he was a chance witness---Said eye-witness also made dishonest improvements in his statement recorded during trial from the one he had given to the police and admitted that, after arrival of the police at the spot, the statement of the complainant was recorded first thus, it provided strength to the view that FIR was lodged at crime spot after deliberation and consultations---Investigation conducted in the present case was neither fair nor honest, therefore, the alleged recovery crime weapons from accused persons lost its legal worth---Prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond any reasonable doubt, therefore, while extending them benefit of doubt, they were acquitted of all the charges levelled against them---Appeal was disposed of accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Reappraisal of evidence---Unnatural conduct of accused party in deliberately leaving the complainant and eye-witnesses alive---According to the FIR, all the accused persons encircled…
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