| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2062 2019 SLD 2062 2019 PLJ 725 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. A. No. 313 of 2011 and Crl. Rev. No. 135 of 2011, heard on 06.03.2019.
FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Talat Mehmood Kakezai, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Malik Mudassar Ali, Deputy Prosecutor General Ch. Haq Nawaz, Advocate
Crl. A. No. 313 of 2011 and Crl. Rev. No. 135 of 2011, heard on 06.03.2019.
FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Talat Mehmood Kakezai, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Malik Mudassar Ali, Deputy Prosecutor General Ch. Haq Nawaz, Advocate
MUHAMMAD YAR ETC.
VS
STATE ETC.
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,201,302,302(b)
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 340(2),342,382B,544A
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----Ss. 302(b)/201--Interested & Chance witness--Appreciation of Evidence--Acquittal of--The complainant neither in his written application nor in his statement before the Court disclosed any evidence against the appellants, however, during investigation, the Investigating Officers recorded the statements of PWs who claimed themselves as eye-witnesses of catching hold arms of deceased by appellant followed by accused persons and thereafter infliction of injury with sota at the head of deceased by appellant; both these witnesses are, however, not residents of near or around the place of occurrence rather residents of another district and at a distance of 200 kilometers from the place of occurrence--Occurrence allegedly took place at night in the street where no source of light has been disclosed by the above said PWs, how they identified accused persons and deceased and how they came to know about their names is a mystery, which could not be answered by them till now; the claim of these PWs is that they saw the occurrence being committed in the street but no one of the said street has confirmed this fact; even during investigation, neither they pointed out said alleged place of occurrence to the Investigating Officer nor any site-plan regarding the same was prepared--both witnesses have not witnessed the occurrence and they have just become the witnesses on asking of one--Both these witnesses are not only interested and chance witnesses but also introduced and tutored--Nothing has been recovered from the appellants during investigation--the identification of dead body of deceased was difficult in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case--Lady doctor in the post-mortem and in her statement before the Court depicts that it was almost impossible to have its identification--Appeal is allowed. Chance Witness-- ----It is trite of law that chance witnesses cannot be relied upon in murder case without strong corroboration from unimpeachable, independent and strong evidence. 2015 SCMR 1142; 2016 SCMR 1233; 2017 SCMR 564; 2018 SCMR 787 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE----.--- Through this single…
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