Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,324,336,337-D,341,394,403,511

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 161,164,173,200,202,265C,342,382B

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 394, 511, 324, 341, 403, 336 & 34---Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery, attempting to commit offence punishable with imprisonment for life or a shorter term, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, wrongful restraint, dishonest misappropriation of property, Itlaf-i-Salahiyaat-i-Udw common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that the accused-appellants on motorcycle intercepted the complainant and victim and asked them that despite their directions they did not close pan cabin; suddenly, accused-appellants took out pistol from fold of his shalwar and fired straight upon the complainant party which hit brother of complainant on left upper side of abdomen, who fell down from the motorcycle, co-accused robbed an amount of Rs. 86000 and three CNICs from the pocket of injured---Ocular account of the prosecution case hinged on testimonies of complainant and two prosecution witnesses by narrating the story of occurrence---Allegedly, injured remained unconscious for seven days and regained his senses in the hospital---First Information Report was lodged against the accused on 31.3.2016, contents of which were not read over to the complainant, hence he instituted direct complaint in the Court---Witness, claiming to be an eye-witness, did not support the complainant with regard to alleged robbery of Rs. 86000/- and three CNICs, as disclosed by the complainant---Said witness had not supported the complainant that appellant/accused made straight fire, which hit left side of abdomen of victim and in cross-examination, he had stated that the incident had occurred in dark night but he identified the accused in the light of the motorcycle---Witness had further stated that police did not record his statement after registration of the case and admitted that there was no mention of robbery in his statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C.---Investigating Officer had admitted that statements of persons from the vicinity had not been recorded---Circumstances established that prosecution had failed to discharge its responsibility of proving the case against the appellants/accused beyond shadow of…

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