| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 2727 2018 SLD 2727 2018 PCRLJ 51 |
Criminal Appeal No. 70 and Murder Reference No. 101 of 2012, heard on 24-06-2016.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE AALIA NEELUM, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari and Khalida Parveen
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Ikhlaq, Deputy Prosecutor-General
SAFDAR ABBAS AND ANOTHER
VS
GHULAM SARWAR AND ANOTHER
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,302,337-L(2)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 337-L(2) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, hurt, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Accused persons hit complainant party with sota (long stick) consequently two persons were injured and one died---Motive was civil litigation over a land and harvesting of crop---Occurrence took place at 9.00 a.m. and matter was reported to police at 2.00 p.m. on same day which was sufficient promptitude because, firstly, police station was at 14-kilometers distance from place of occurrence, and the injured were shifted to hospital by complainant---Presence of accused at place of occurrence and taking part in occurrence was not denied by defence---Presence of prosecution witnesses was not shattered during cross-examination---No chances, of mistaken identity of accused at time of occurrence---Taking into consideration close relationship of eye-witnesses, it could not be expected of them that they would let off real culprits who had brutally murdered their loved ones---Medical evidence reflected that it was in line with ocular account to the extent of accused---Motive was also admitted by defence---Recovery of weapon of offence from accused was also proved by statement of witnesses---Deceased died due to cumulative effect of injuries sustained by him was an extenuating circumstance---Death sentence was converted into imprisonment for life along with fine---Accused were also convicted under S. 337-L(2), P.P.C. which Trial Court omitted to do---Appeal was disposed of accordingly. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Testimony of related witness---Scope---Mere relationship of witness with deceased would not make the witness interested---No hard and fast rule existed that depositions made by close relatives could not be believed merely on basis of their relationship with deceased. Muhammad Aslam v. The State 2012 SCMR 593 rel. (c) Maxim--- ----Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus (false in one thing false in all) was not applicable to present system of criminal administration of justice---No rule of universal application existed which depicted that where some accused were found not guilty, other accused would ipso facto stood…
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