Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1609 2020 SLD 1609 2020 1342
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Criminal Appeals Nos. D-26, D-27 and Criminal Confirmation Case No. D-02 of 2016, decision Dated: 14-03-2019, hearing Date : 06-03-2019
MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, JUSTICE IRSHAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Ali Ahmed Khan for Appellant. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.

RAJIB

VS

THE STATE

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302,324,353,34

Law: Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965

Section: 13(e)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 38

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 353 & 34---Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13(e)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of the duty, common intention, possessing illicit weapon---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Police received information through telephone that accused had entered into the house for committing robbery---Complainant along with other Police Officials proceeded towards the pointed place by foot---Police reached the house and had seen two persons one armed with country made pistol and other with pistol---Accused seeing the police party fired upon them with intention to commit their murder and went away---Police Official when reached near the accused, he fired upon him whereupon he fell down and was shifted to the hospital where he succumbed to the injuries---Admittedly, neither the names and descriptions of accused were transpired in the FIR nor the accused-appellant had been put to identification parade before any Magistrate---Name of the accused including appellant were disclosed by co-accused, who was arrested at the spot in injured condition during police encounter--- Names of the accused persons were disclosed by witnesses---Record showed that when the injured was being shifted to hospital by the complainant, the other Police Official and injured were also with complainant but they did not disclose the names of accused to complainant---False implication of the accused could not be ruled out, in circumstances---No questions regarding medical evidence and examination report of weapon were put to appellant in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Such evidence could not be used against him---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances. Qaddan and others v. The State 2017 SCMR 148 rel. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 38---Admission of accused before police---Scope---Admission of accused before police could not be used as evidence against co-accused. Farman Ali v. The State 1997 SCMR 971 rel. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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