| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 913 2017 SLD 913 2017 PLJ 50 |
Federal Shariat Court
Crl. Appeal No. 104/I of 2010, decided on 2.12.2016. Date of hearing: 28.11.2016.
MRS. ASHRAF, JAHAN, JUSTICE
Ms. Nasreen Zafar, Advocate for Appellants. Mr. Ali Haider, Asstt.P.G. Sindh for State.
Crl. Appeal No. 104/I of 2010, decided on 2.12.2016. Date of hearing: 28.11.2016.
MRS. ASHRAF, JAHAN, JUSTICE
Ms. Nasreen Zafar, Advocate for Appellants. Mr. Ali Haider, Asstt.P.G. Sindh for State.
ATTIQ-UR-REHMAN AND another--AppellantS
VS
STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 (VI of 1979)-- ----S. 17(4)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Offence of murder--Brutal murder of deceased was committed in course of present crime--Death is concerned, this fact is even not disputed by either side--But moot point is as to whether present appellants are involved in causing murder of deceased or not--Star witness of prosecution is daughter-in-law of deceased and complainant--She in her evidence has clearly and categorically deposed that present appellant alongwith two accused has committed murder--Perusal of evidence reveals that daughter-in-law of deceased in clear words has implicated present appellant along with two other accused persons whom she had lateron identified at time of identification parade before IIIrd Extra Joint Civil Judge--Above witness was cross-examined by counsel for appellants but her evidence on all material points has gone unshaken--It has come in evidence that accused was earlier working at furniture shop of complainant, therefore, he was familiar with family members--Availability of accused persons at time of incident in house of complainant causing murder, of deceased and recovery of weapons used in crime have neither been disputed nor challenged by defence counsel during cross-examination--It is also apparent from facts of this case that PW has no enmity, personal grudge or motive against appellants to implicate them maliciously--F.I.R. has been lodged promptly against appellant and his two associates--No enmity of appellants with complainant party prior to incident is neither alleged nor proved by defence--Simply it was suggested that accused have been falsely implicated due to enmity but no details or nature of enmity is disclosed--So far as evidence of remaining PWs is concerned, there appears no material contradiction in their evidence--Do not able to find any material discrepancy or contradiction in prosecution evidence or any misreading or non-reading of evidence by Trial Court coming to conclusion regarding guilt of present appellants--On contrary it appears that evidence brought on record by prosecution is confidence-inspiring and…
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