| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2377 2019 SLD 2377 2019 PLJ 443 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Crl. A. Nos. 8-P & 9-P of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 02.05.2019. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 30.04.2015 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar & Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Appeals No. 440-P & 458-P of 2013 respectively).
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Haroon Iqbal, ASC (in both cases).
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Mujahid Ali Khan, Additional Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (in both cases).
Crl. A. Nos. 8-P & 9-P of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 02.05.2019. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 30.04.2015 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar & Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Appeals No. 440-P & 458-P of 2013 respectively).
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Haroon Iqbal, ASC (in both cases).
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Mujahid Ali Khan, Additional Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (in both cases).
FAZAL SUBHAN AND ANOTHER
VS
STATE AND OTHERS
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 7(e)
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 40
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 365A
Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 (XXVII of 1997)-- ----S. 7(E)--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 365-A--Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, (10 of 1984), Art. 40-Conviction and sentence-Challenge to--Memo of pointation--No forensic proof regarding conversation on the cell phone--Vehicle was not recovered--Appreciation of evidence--Benefit of doubt--Acquittal of--Appellants along with co-accused were tried for abducting PW to extract ransom with co-accused--The captors demanded rupees five million from his brother--Abductee somehow managed his escape to appear before the police in person--Memo of pointing out of place of occurrence cannot be equated with disclosure within the contemplation Article 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984--How the abductee made his escape good despite being held by no less than four persons--Demand of ransom from abductee's brother is a verbal assertion alone with no forensic proof regarding conversation on the cell phone--Vehicle was not recovered from any of the accused and the person who produced it is not in the array--It is unsafe to maintain the conviction--Impugned s are set aside and the appellants shall be set at liberty. Memo of pointation-- ----Memo of pointing out of place of occurrence cannot be equated with disclosure within the contemplation Article 40 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.- Criminal Appeal No. 8-P/2017 and Criminal Appeal No. 9-P/2017, filed by Fazal Subhan and Rehmat Ullah, appellants herein, respectively, arisen out of judgment dated 1.8.2013 by Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, Peshawar subsequently affirmed by the learned Peshawar High Court, bear a common thread; these are being decided through this single judgment. 2. The appellants along with co-accused, Shah Jee, were tried for abducting Abdul Haseeb, PW to extract ransom with co- accused Amjad being away from law. They were convicted under Section 365-A of Pakistan Penal Code, 1898 read with Section 7(e) of the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997 and sentenced to imprisonment for life. For a charge under Section 17(3) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, they were additionally…
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