| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 218 2017 SLD 218 2017 PLJ 84 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. A. No. 400-J of 2011 & M.R. No. 27 of 2010, heard on 16.12.2015
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA AND FARRUKH GULZAR AWAN, JJ.
Mr. Mudassar Altaf Qureshi, Advocate for Appellant. Mrs. Saeeda Asif, Advocate for Complainant. Mr. Abdul Qayyum, Additional Prosecutor General for State.
Crl. A. No. 400-J of 2011 & M.R. No. 27 of 2010, heard on 16.12.2015
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA AND FARRUKH GULZAR AWAN, JJ.
Mr. Mudassar Altaf Qureshi, Advocate for Appellant. Mrs. Saeeda Asif, Advocate for Complainant. Mr. Abdul Qayyum, Additional Prosecutor General for State.
LAALU-
VS
STATE--Respondent
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,302(b),324
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 342
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)---- --------Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34----Qatal-i-amd----Sentence----Role of associates----Proclaimed offenders----Direct statements of both witnesses are, in line with case of prosecution set up regarding mode and manner of occurrence and role of appellant causing injuries on person of deceased and PW----Evidence of both witnesses describing mode and manner of occurrence, role of appellant causing injuries on person of deceased and PW can be surely believed, relied and acted upon----Specific role has been attributed to appellant of causing injuries not only to deceased but also to injured-eye-witness----Credibility and reliability of witnesses could not be shaken in cross-examination----No motive, bias or animosity was attributed to witnesses PWs prompting Court even to presume element of deliberation, false implication----Appellant did not cause any injury deceased and complainant but he was held liable on principle of vicarious liability----Arrival of appellant with his associate at place of occurrence while armed with fire-arms, participating in occurrence, causing injury to one of deceased and injured-eye-witness in absence of any contrary material sufficient prove element of common intention----Prosecution has successfully proved its case against appellant beyond shadow of doubt under Sections 302, 324 read with Section 34 of PPC, committing Qatal-i-Amad of and causing murderous assault upon PWs deceased persons----Court maintain conviction of appellant under Section 302(b) r/w Section 34 and Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Code on two counts. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)---- --------S. 342----Abscondance----Ocular account----Abscondane of appellant for a period of more than two years in absence of any explanation on behalf of appellant in his statement under Section 342 of Cr.P.C. is another factor to be kept in view providing corroboration to ocular account regarding culpability of appellant. [P. 92] C Delay in FIR---- --------Distance of 28 kilometer from place of occurrence----Occurrence of night----Complainant in his statement did not utter even a single word explaining delay but keeping in…
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