Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,302(b),354,449,452

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

Section: 38,39,40

Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: 27

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 87,88,161,164,174,340(2),342,382B,544A

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 354, 449, 452 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty, house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Complainant as prosecution witness had correctly narrated the story as contained in the FIR and nowhere he was derailed from his previous deposition---Statements of the most important and star witnesses, the daughter and widow of the deceased, were similar with each other---Said witnesses had correctly identified accused in the Trial Court and correctly stated the date, time, the place of occurrence and the manner in which the occurrence had taken place---Said witnesses being dwellers of the house where occurrence took place, their presence in the house could not be doubted, rather their presence at the relevant time, was natural---Other prosecution witness, the neighbourer of the deceased, had also identified the accused in the court---All prosecution witnesses were reliable, trustworthy and credible---Identity of accused, could not be doubted as prior to the incident, accused remained Buzgar of deceased's family---Defence had cross-examined the witnesses at sufficient length, but had failed to give any dent or damage to their testimony---Some minor discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, were not substantive enough to create reasonable doubt in the case of prosecution about the involvement and guilt of accused---Recovery of crime weapon i.e. T.T. Pistol, was effected on the pointation of accused---Accused had confessed his guilt by disclosing the names of absconding accused persons who persuaded him for committing the murder of deceased---Case of prosecution, had further been strengthened by the confessional statement of accused under S.164, Cr.P.C.---Such statement was recorded without any coercion, pressure, torture or blackmailing---No reason existed to disagree or disbelieve such confessional statement---Plea of 'alibi' taken by accused, was not of worth credence---Prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against accused through direct,…

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