Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2053 2018 SLD 2053 2018 YLR 1964
Federal Shariat Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1-K of 2017, decided on 14-05-2018. Date of hearing: 10-05-2018.
MEHMOOD MQBOOL BAJWA, JUSTICE SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, JUSTICE SHAUKAT ALI RAKHSHANI, JUSTICE
Aijaz Shaikh for Appellant. Saleem Akhtar Buriro, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.

HAJI ABDUL JABBAR THEBO

VS

IMDAD ALI AND 6 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324 & 337(i)---Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(4)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing Shajjah, haraabah---Appeal against acquittal---Reappraisal of evidence---Incident had occurred in the dark night in the open fields, where there was no source of any light---Report was lodged to the Police with delay of 39 hours without any plausible explanation, which had given rise to question of premeditation, consultation and deliberation---No reliance could be placed upon such evidence/afterthought, being outcome of consultation and deliberation---Source of identification narrated by the eye-witnesses, was the car head lights, which source could not be believed as a strong reason for identifying culprits in circumstances---Driver of the vehicle, who was eye-witness of the occurrence, had not been produced without any plausible and cogent reason---Non-production of such an essential witness had created doubt in the case of the prosecution---Recovery of the spoils of dacoity and weapon used in the crime, though were corroborative in nature, but would lose its worth, if the substantive evidence was found to be doubtful---Statement of recovery witness was contrary on material points, which had made the recovery proceedings doubtful---Recovery of mobile set was irrelevant to the crime as neither the call data report had been collected nor at the time of lodging FIR any details of mobile number and design and colour, were furnished---No explicit reliance could be placed on recovery as the prosecution had failed to establish said recovery through independent witness and also beyond any reasonable doubt---Medical evidence, at the best had proved the unnatural death of the deceased with fire arm, but did not connect accused persons in any manner with the murder of the deceased---Impugned of the Trial Court did not suffer from any illegality, perversity, mis-reading and non-reading of evidence---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed, in circumstances. Farman Ahmad v. Muhammad Inayat 2007 SCMR 1825; Kashif Ali v. Judge ATA PLD…
🔒
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