Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 234 2019 SLD 234 2019 YLR 22
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 45, 35 and 29 of 2014, heard on 06-09-2018.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Sharif Bhatti, Javed Iqbal Adham, Zeeshan Haider and Sardar Israr Hussain Dahir Nemo
Respondent(s) by: Najeeb Ullah Jatoi, Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab

AMIR HUSSAIN AND OTHERS

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 365

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7(e)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 365---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7(e)---Kidnapping or abduction for ransom amount, act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---First Information Report unambiguously suggested that incident was reported same day through a direct approach at the Police Station; none was arrayed by name initially---Complainant, seemingly a well-off entrepreneur joined by his family members, could not be conceivably expected to come up with an ominous and fake plea of abduction involving his son aged just 7 years---Star witness/alleged abductee, though, of an impressionable age, intelligently responded to court queries and thus, was rightly admitted in the witness box pointing, unmistakably, his accusing finger upon accused persons---Abductee, who stayed in captivity with accused persons till his release, had every opportunity to identify his captors---In absence of any material, suggestive of contra possibility, his evidence could not be brushed aside, merely on the hypothesis of being under parental influence---Abductee was found confidence inspiring against his tormentors---Usual lapse on the part of the Police would not by itself diminish evidentiary value of the statements of prosecution witnesses, when taken in the overall framework of prosecution case---Complainant, in his examination-in-chief, asserted to identify accused person by their names and faces as he had earlier seen them at their work place before they came across him after abduction of his son; defence had opted not to contest that position---Recovered amount with previous signatures by itself ruled out the possibility of a mock exercise designed to revenge a trivial altercation---No space was to entertain any hypothesis of accused person's innocence---Accused persons having rightly been convicted and sentenced, no interference was called for, except for a direction for sentences to run concurrently. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Arhum Waheed, 7, was playing outside his home on 20.10.2013 when at 2:30 p.m, whisked away by two pillion riders; commotion by playmates attracted from the neighborhood, amongst other, Habib-ur- Rehman and…
πŸ”’
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