Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,302,302(b)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103,161,340(2),342,374,544A

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Qatl-i-Amd---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of eyewitnesses---Proof---Recovery proceedings---Benefit of doubt---Four accused persons were sent to face trial out of which two were acquitted of charge and two were convicted with death sentence to one accused and imprisonment for life to the second---Validity---Investigating officer did not take clothes of eyewitnesses, which were stained with blood, into possession---If clothes were sent to chemical examiner for examination and grouping with that of blood-stained clothes of deceased, same would have proved strongest corroboration to testimony of eyewitnesses---Deceased was real brother of complainant and other prosecution witnesses who neither identified dead body at time of post-mortem examination nor they were mentioned as present near dead body at the time of preparation of inquest report---Police did not associate any resident of locality in investigation for purpose of recovery---Recovery proceedings were conducted in violation of S.103, Cr.P.C. and same were hit by exclusionary rule of evidence and could not be considered--- High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused persons and acquitted them of charge---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Zahir Yousaf and another v. The State and another 2017 SCMR 2002; Muhammad Rafiq v. State 2014 SCMR 1698; Nasrullah alias Nasro v. The State 2017 SCMR 724; Muhammad Ashraf v. State 2012 SCMR 419; Nadeem alias Nanha alias Billa Sher v. The State 2010 SCMR 949; Barkat Ali v. Muhammad Asif and others 2007 SCMR 1812; Muhammad Hussain v. The State 2008 SCMR 345; Irfan Ali v. The State 2015 SCMR 840; Gulfam and another v. The State 2017 SCMR 1189; Muhammad Ismail and others v. The State 2017 SCMR 898; Muhammad Javed v. The State 2016 SCMR 2021; Muhammad Mansha v. The State 2018 SCMR 772 and Muhammad Akram v. The State 2009 SCMR 230 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRM, J.--- The appellants namely Muhammad Hashim son of Manzoor Hussain and Muhammad Asim alias Pooma son of Manzoor Hussain were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Multan, in case FIR…

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