Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 276 2019 SLD 276 2019 YLR 18
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 79, 99 and Murder Reference No. 4 of2016, decision Dated: 21-05-2018. Hearing Dated: 19-04-2018.
AAMER FAROOQ, JUSTICE MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Arshad Tabrez and Ansar Nawaz Mirza (in Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2016). Ch. Zafar Ali Warraich (in Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2016). Ch. Zafar Ali Warriach (in Criminal Appeal No.99 of 2016).
Respondent(s) by: Sadaqat Ali Jahangi

MOHAMMAD AWAISVSTHE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 109,302(b)

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

Section: 150,151

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss.302(b)/109---Qatl-i-amd, abetment---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction of---No mala fide was on the part of prosecution, especially the complainant to involve accused in the case---Accused was the person who was lastly seen with the deceased, while holding pistol in his hand; when prosecution witness, who was the house-maid of the deceased, reached after hearing the fire shot---Doctor, had stated in her examination-in-Chief that injuries on the person of the deceased, were caused from approximate distance of two feet or above; which had confirmed that it was not a case of suicide as alleged by accused---Deceased lady was doing routine cooking and house-keeping on the day of incident---Deceased was neither frustrated nor depressed in any manner to commit suicide---Prosecution witness, who was house-maid, before being declared as hostile witness, had stated that deceased had a pistol in her hand, which was taken by her, but said witness had stated that at that time the deceased told that accused would kill her and she needed the pistol; whereupon the maid returned the pistol to the deceased---Such kind of statement gave an impression that the deceased was under fear of her death and therefore, she kept the pistol for her safety and protection---Injuries on the person of the deceased, had explained the conduct of accused who tortured and assaulted the deceased prior to her death; which had been corroborated by the evidence of prosecution witness (maid) though she was declared hostile, but the status of hostile witness, was not to be outrightly discarded, unless based upon lies or the witness was not truthful---Medical evidence had corroborated the entire scenario that the death of the deceased was not suicide, rather it was homicidal---Plea of defence regarding the fact of suicide by the deceased, had not been proved---Deceased was murdered with the help of 9 mm Brotha although its recovery had no legal significance, especially when same was recovered by the Investigating Officer after 11 days of the arrest of accused---Empty was recovered vide recovery memo on the day ofincident---Weapon of offence and the crime…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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