Case Details

Citation(s)
SLG 1952 (2019) 124 SLD 1952 (2019) 125 PCRLJ 1378
Sindh High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No. S-15 of 2015, decision Dated:01-09-2018. Hearing Dated: 09-08-2018.
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Attaullah Abro No.1.
Respondent(s) by: Ms. Reshman Oad, APG

MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM AND ANOTHERVSTHE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 109,302

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103,161,265C,342,382B,544A

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302 & 109---Qatl-i-amd, abetment---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused was charged for committing murder of the father of complainant by fire shots---Ocular account of the occurrence was furnished by two witnesses including the complainant---Complainant had deposed that when he reached at the scenario he saw injuries on the right side of deceased father, whereas eye-witness (sons) had deposed that when they reached there and saw injuries on the left side of the deceased (father)---Said witnesses were blood related inter se and were brothers---Both the witnesses had contradicted their version by making injuries on the person of the deceased dubious---Record showed that there was marriage ceremony in the village nearby the place of incident but no independent person had been invited to act as a mashir of wardat---In absence of cogent, reliable and independent evidence, prosecution had totally failed to bring true account of the occurrence---Witnesses were interested witnesses and their testimony could not be relied upon altogether being sons of the deceased---Only source of identification were electronic bulbs which had never been collected by the Investigating Officer because the incident as alleged had happened in odd hours of the night (3.00 a.m.); in absence of such type of evidence, it was not possible to prove the version of the complainant for identification on the source of lightening bulbs---Eye-witness had deposed that deceased was lying in the veranda just adjacent to the wall of the street, but other witness had deposed that he had seen the deceased on the ground in the street backside of the house---Said witnesses had collided from their statements being eye-witnesses and did not offer true account of the scenario as to where the deceased was killed and the dead body was lying either inside the house or at the dwelling street of the village---Investigating Officer had sent the blood-stained clothes as allegedly recovered to the Forensic Science Laboratory but said report could not find place in the record---Alleged country-made pistol and the empty cartridges as recovered had not been sent to…
🔒
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