| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 98 2018 SLD 98 2018 SCMR 153 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 132-L of 2015, decision & hearing Date : 25-10-2017 On appeal from the judgment of the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore Dated 28.03.2008 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 107 of 2004 and Crl. Appeal No. 107-J of 2004 and Crl. Revision No. 51
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE
Nemo for Appellant. Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. for the State. Ch. Muhammad Rafiq Jathol, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2.
Criminal Appeal No. 132-L of 2015, decision & hearing Date : 25-10-2017 On appeal from the judgment of the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore Dated 28.03.2008 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 107 of 2004 and Crl. Appeal No. 107-J of 2004 and Crl. Revision No. 51
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE
Nemo for Appellant. Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. for the State. Ch. Muhammad Rafiq Jathol, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2.
NADEEM ALIAS KALA
VS
THE STATE & OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b)
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 342,544-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Case was lodged about three days after the occurrence despite the fact that distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was just one kilometer whereas the hospital where the deceased was treated was about 1-1/2 kilometers from the spot---Inordinate delay of three days in setting the machinery of law in motion was not explained---Chances of deliberations and consultations on the part of the complainant for false implication of the accused could not be ruled out---Presence of both the witnesses of ocular account at the place of occurrence was also not free from doubts---During cross-examination the complainant stated that deceased in injured condition was shifted to hospital on a carry van but he could not disclose the registration number of the van or name of the driver of vehicle---Complainant also deposed during his cross-examination that his clothes were also stained with blood but stated that he did not produce the blood stained clothes to the police---Both the witnesses of ocular account contradicted each other regarding arrival of the police at the place of occurrence---Medical evidence was not in line with the ocular account---Recovery of pistol at the instance of the accused was inconsequential because report of Forensic Science Laboratory was not put to him while examining him under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Motive behind the occurrence was rightly disbelieved by the Trial Court and the High Court---Accused was acquitted of the charge of murder in circumstances---Appeal was allowed accordingly. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE:---.--- Having been convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. by a learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska, District Sialkot, vide judgment dated 17.12.2003, the convict-appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) under section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default of the payment of compensation amount, he had to undergo three months' RI. He was extended the benefit of section…
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