Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 607 2019 SLD 607 2019 MLD 244
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 296 and Murder Reference No. 36 of 2015, heard on 17-10-2018.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mian Muhammad Tayyab Wattoo
Respondent(s) by: Asghar Ali Gill, Deputy Prosecutor General

MUHAMMAD SHARIF

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Impugned passed by Trial Court was primarily based upon position of accused taken during his examination under S.342, Cr.P.C.; holding that aspect of the case in abeyance for a whole, there were many questions that warranted answers; of them, the most intriguing was participation of five real brothers in the crime---Violance suffered by the deceased was not commensurate with number of accused, nor the weapons held by two of them---Contention that net had been cast wide to involve the entire family did not sound unrealistic---Question as to why the accused shifted the deceased after murder to their home was not understandable; there was no apparent purpose likely to be served, except for incurring embarrassment with a formidable proof of crime inside their precinct---Accused was acquitted from the charge and was ordered to be released forthwith, in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 342---Examination of accused---Purpose of examination of accused was to confront him with the evidence produced by prosecution, and likely to be used against him---Said exercise was carried out to acquaint the accused with incriminatory material with a view to enable him to vindicate his position---Procedural fairness required that accused was not taken by surprise---Question though could be put to accused at any stage of trial, however, more often than not, attention of accused was invited after closure of the prosecution case---In the face of rejection of prosecution evidence or its failure to drive home the charge, explanation offered by accused could not be allowed to substitute the declared proof---Statement of accused had to be viewed in toto without quantification or dissections in pieces, adverse to accused. Azhar Iqbal v. The State 2013 SCMR 383 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Muhammad Jehangir, 30, hereinafter referred to as the deceased, was done to death on 9-8-2013 at 7:30 a.m. within the area of Village Mohib Ali, situating 6-kilometers from Police Station Donga Bonga, District Bahawalnagar; incident was reported by his…
🔒
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