Law: Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979

Section: 17,17(2)(4)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 22

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 161,342

(a) Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979)--- ----S. 17(2) & (4)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 161---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.22---Haraabah---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Benefit of doubt---Night-time occurrence---Delay in recording statement under S.161, Cr.P.C.---Delayed identification parade---Effect---Accused persons were charged for committing murder and injurying another person---Complainant (eye-witness) did not describe the assailants in FIR but identified the accused persons in the identification parade---Complainant and injured eye-witness nominated three assailants but in his suplementary statement complainant nominated four persons---Injured eye-witness admitted in his cross-examination that the occurrence took place in the wink of an eye but claimed to have identified the culprits---Prudent mind could not believe that in a dark night, complainant and injured eye-witness were able to identify the assailants, who emerged in the wink of an eye, made indiscriminate firing and escaped---Statement of injured eye-witness was recorded after considerable delay, although an explanation was offered to the effect that he was admitted in the hospital but no evidence was produced to prove that he was unable to get his statement recorded---Delayed statement of injured eye-witness impaired its evidentiary value---Procedure of identification was carried out only two times instead of thrice, which was not lawful---Identification parade was conducted with a considerable delay after the arrest of accused persons---7 mm empties were taken into possession from the crime scene on the very next morning but after recovery of 8 mm rifle, investigating officer managed an opinion from an armourer, who opined subsequently that empties were of 8 mm rifle instead, whereof no other inference could be drawn except that prosecution had maneuvered the recovery of the empties with the purpose to match it with 8 mm rifle---Prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond doubt against the accused persons---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed. Muhammad Asif v. The State 2017 SCMR 486; Ghulam Qadir and 2…

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