| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2079 2019 SLD 2079 2019 PLJ 890 |
High Court (AJ&K)
Crl. As. No. 176 & 177 of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 08.03.2018.
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Kh. Arshad Mehmood, Advocate Mr. Maqsood Ahmed Qureshi and Sardar Jameel Khan, Advocates
Respondent(s) by: AAG
Crl. As. No. 176 & 177 of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 08.03.2018.
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Kh. Arshad Mehmood, Advocate Mr. Maqsood Ahmed Qureshi and Sardar Jameel Khan, Advocates
Respondent(s) by: AAG
DOCTOR MEHMOOD HUSSAIN KIANI
VS
AHTISHAM MUGHAL AND ANOTHER
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 363,364A
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 161,237,242,340(2),342
Azad Penal Code-- ----S. 364-A--AJK Zina Hadood Act, Ss. 10 & 18--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Kidnapping of--Commission of zina--Medico Legal report--Statement of victim--Hardened Criminal--Enhancement of sentence--It is crystal clear that when anyone who takes or entices any minor from his lawful guardian is said to have committed offence, irrespective of fact that minor/abductee is recovered from accused or not and whether rape is committed or not--Once a person entices any minor/female less then age of 16 years and takes away without consent of guardian, he is said to have committed offence of kidnapping--It is to be noted even that -consent of minor does not exonerate offender--Once accused took away child, offence completed--Evidence of a victim, if shown to be confidence inspiring can be made a basis of conviction,, as generally such offences are committed behind curtain, not in front of public, so, insistence of defence for more ocular evidence is not tenable--Prosecution has proved its case beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt against convict-Appellant that he enticed victim for sexual intercourse; however, he failed to do so, but made an attempt, which is proved from medico legal report when read with statement of victim--It is proved that convict-appellant has committed offence under Sections 364-A, APC & 18, ZHA--Therefore, learned Court below commit teed no illegality or irregularity while convicting accused through impugned --Evidence shows that convict-appellant is not a ordinary culprit--He comes within definition of an hardened, desperate and habitual criminal--P.W. Shoukat Hussain deposed in his Court statement that previously another case No.28/11 in offence under Section 18 ZHA was also registered against convict-appellant--No evidence has been produced which may suggest that convict-respondent was of good character and no such alleged incident ever taken place--So when it is proved beyond any reasonable doubt that convict-appellant after kidnapping a girl of 8 years age and made an attempt of rape, he does not deserve any leniency--Learned trial Court has awarded minimum punishment under Section 364-A, APC--Offender is…
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