| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 2088 2018 SLD 2088 2018 PLJ 593 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. A. No. 205 of 2013, M.R. No. 41 of 2013, heard on 11.12.2017.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE ASJAD, JAVAID GHURAL, JUSTICE
Rana Muhammad Nadeem Kanjoo, Advocate for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Asif Saeed, Advocate for Complainant. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shahab, D.P.G. for State.
Crl. A. No. 205 of 2013, M.R. No. 41 of 2013, heard on 11.12.2017.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE ASJAD, JAVAID GHURAL, JUSTICE
Rana Muhammad Nadeem Kanjoo, Advocate for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Asif Saeed, Advocate for Complainant. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shahab, D.P.G. for State.
GHULAM ABBAS
VS
STATE AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
Conviction-- ----Capital charge--Testimony--Chance witness--It is well settled by now that in order to maintain conviction of a convict on capital charge on basis of testimony of chance witnesses Court has to be at guard and corroboration is to be sought for relying upon any such evidence--But no corroboration is available in this case. Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 302(b)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Benefit of doubt--Evidence which has been disbelieved by trial Court to extent of majority of accused cannot be made basis for conviction of appellant unless corroborated by independent piece of evidence which is completely lacking in this case--Suffice it to observe that unless blood stained earth or cotton and blood stained clothes of victim are not sent with same for opinion of serologist to effect that it was human blood and was of same group which was available on clothes of victim and blood stained earth/cotton, such inconclusive opinion cannot be used as a piece of corroboratory evidence--Alleged recovery of a pistol from appellant's possession during investigation was legally inconsequential because report of Forensic Science Laboratory brought on record shows that recovered pistol and secured crime-empties had been received by Forensic Science Laboratory together on one and same day--It is also pertinent to mention here, appellant while in police custody led to recovery of motorcycle and pistol which were taken into possession respectively and attesting witness to both these recoveries of incriminating articles are complainant PWs whose testimonies Court have already disbelieved as a whole--Even registration number of motorcycles, their colour and make were not mentioned by the' complainant--No crime empty has been shown present there, albeit in recovery memo. and in site plan, these empties had been shown recovered lying very close to dead body--This deliberate omission, creates reasonable doubts about recovery--In view of analysis and combined study of entire evidence and careful appraisal of same Court is led to an inescapable conclusion that prosecution case is full of improbabilities, legal and factual infirmities of…
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