Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),324,34

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

Section: 22

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 22---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Re-appraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---In the FIR the culprits had not been nominated and they were mentioned as unknown---No description of the culprits had been recorded in the FIR---Accused had been arrested in connection with the present case at a time when he was already under arrest in connection with some other criminal case---According to the FIR itself the firing resorted to at the spot had been made from behind some trees, and, thus, at best the injured eye-witnesses under assault could only have a fleeting glance at the assailants while the witnesses were taking shelter and were running for their lives---Investigating officer had clearly stated that he could not deny that the accused had been shown to the eye-witnesses before holding of the test identification parade---One of the injured eye-witnesses, had acknowledged before the Trial Court that the accused persons had been shown to him at the police station before holding of the test identification parade---Proceedings of the test identification parade clearly showed that the accused had not been picked up by the eye-witnesses with reference to any role played by him during the occurrence---Apart from that the test identification parade was a joint parade wherein two accused persons had been made to stand with dummies in two lines and their identification had taken place simultaneously in one go, which was the improper procedure for holding such a parade---Safe custody of the recovered weapon and its safe transmission to the Forensic Science Laboratory had never been proved by the prosecution before the Trial Court through production of any witness concerned with such custody and transmission---Two of the eyewitnesses had been declared hostile as they had refused to support the case of the prosecution---One of the co-accused had been acquitted of the charge and his acquittal had not been challenged by the State or the complainant party before the High Court---Prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond…

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