| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1093 2019 SLD 1093 2019 SCMR 631 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 177-L of 2013, decision & hearing Date : 07-03-2019 (On appeal against the judgment Dated 12.03.2010 passed by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. A. No. 1530 of 2010 and Murder Reference No. 647 of 2004)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Munir Ahmad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ms. Tasnim Amin, Advocate-on-Record
Respondent(s) by: Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. Punjab
Criminal Appeal No. 177-L of 2013, decision & hearing Date : 07-03-2019 (On appeal against the judgment Dated 12.03.2010 passed by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. A. No. 1530 of 2010 and Murder Reference No. 647 of 2004)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Munir Ahmad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ms. Tasnim Amin, Advocate-on-Record
Respondent(s) by: Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. Punjab
MUHAMMAD ARIF
VS
THE STATE
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,302,302(b),324,337A(i)(ii),427
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 382B
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324 & 337-A(ii)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah---Reappraisal of evidence---Accused and his co-accused persons were alleged to have murdered the deceased and caused injuries to certain other persons---Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused to death---High Court maintained conviction of accused but reduced his sentence to imprisonment for life---Held, that vehicle of the complainant's side was assaulted allegedly by the accused and three others at about 05:30 a.m. and the crime was reported to the police at 05:45 a.m. i.e. within fifteen minutes---Such circumstance showed that crime was not reported to the police at the time mentioned in the FIR, which made the prosecution case doubtful in nature from its inception---Ocular account was furnished by two witnesses, who made material improvements to their statements while appearing before the Trial Court---Moreover one of the co-accused who was attributed a firearm injury on the person of injured witness was acquitted by the High Court---Ocular account was not fully supported by the medical evidence because in the FIR as well as before the Trial Court only one injury on the person of deceased was attributed to the accused, however, in the post mortem examination report two firearm injuries were observed---No explanation whatsoever was given as to how the second injury was inflicted on the person of deceased---Recovery of the weapons of offence along with live bullets allegedly effected at the instance of the accused was not of much help to the prosecution because report of the Forensic Science Laboratory was simply to the effect that the rifle was in working order---Prosecution claimed that the accused and his accomplices reached at the place of occurrence in a car, chased the car of the complainant's side and decamped from the place of occurrence in the same car---In the FIR, model, make or registration number of the car was not disclosed---In order to prove abscondance of the accused for a period of three months and ten days the prosecution produced a police official who stated during his cross-examination that the address…
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