| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 602 2020 SLD 602 2020 YLR 488 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2017 and Murder Reference No. 4 of 2017, decision & hearing Date : 26-04-2019
CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE
Malik Saeed Ejaz and Muhammad Shamoon Bhatti for Appellant. Najeeb Ullah Jatoi, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State. Syed Ghulam Shabbir Shah for the Complainant.
Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2017 and Murder Reference No. 4 of 2017, decision & hearing Date : 26-04-2019
CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE
Malik Saeed Ejaz and Muhammad Shamoon Bhatti for Appellant. Najeeb Ullah Jatoi, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State. Syed Ghulam Shabbir Shah for the Complainant.
NASEER AHMAD
VS
THE STATE AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302,302(b)
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 173,342,374,544A
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of about one hour in lodging the FIR---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of brother of the complainant by giving a blow of knife, who was shifted to hospital but he succumbed to the injuries---Occurrence took place at 11:30 a.m., case was got registered at 12:30 p.m. on the same day---Post-mortem examination over dead body of the deceased was also conducted at 04:45 p.m. on the same day---Close scrutiny of the record revealed that complainant himself categorically stated in the court while appearing as witness that occurrence took place at 09:30 a.m.---Record showed that dead body was received in the hospital at 04:00 p.m., police papers were received half hour after receipt of dead body and thereafter autopsy was conducted at 04:45 p.m.---Neither the case could be treated as promptly registered nor post-mortem examination could be termed as promptly conducted, in circumstances which suggested that neither complainant nor the cited eye-witnesses were present at the relevant time at the place of occurrence and the time had been consumed by the prosecution in cooking up a story for registration of case and in procuring and planting eye-witnesses---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court. Haroon Shafique v. The State and others 2018 SCMR 2118; Mian Sohail Ahmed and others v. The State and others 2019 SCMR 956 and Muhammad Rafique alias Feeqa v. The State 2019 SCMR 1068 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Chance witnesses--- Non-availability of justification for presence of witnesses at the place of occurrence---Un-natural conduct of eye-witnesses---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of brother of the complainant by giving churri blow---Complainant in application for registration of case mentioned that deceased in injured condition was being carried to hospital on a van but he succumbed to the injuries on the way---While appearing as witness in the court, complainant had…
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