Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 456 2019 SLD 456 2019 PCRLJ 325
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 275 and Murder Reference No. 29 of2014/BWP, heard on 13-09-2018.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Ch. Imran Ashraf
Respondent(s) by: Asghar Ali Gill, Deputy Prosecutor-General along with Khalid, ASI

PEERU RAMVSTHE STATE AND OTHERS

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence--- Benefit of doubt---Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife/sister of the complainant---Record showed that the scene of crime was situated at a distance of 9-kilometers from police station and the complaint was forwarded to police station through Police Qaumi Razakar (PQR) who was not produced during trial---Inference, in circumstances, could be drawn that had PQR been produced as witness, he would not have supported the case of prosecution---Eye-witnesses had stated consistently that the information of occurrence was conveyed to police by brother-in-law of the complainant in the police station and thereafter police arrived at the crime scene---Investigating Officer had stated during cross-examination regarding the receipt of information of occurrence through a telephonic call of moharrar---Said situation suggested that claim of prosecution regarding prompt registration of FIR was not free from doubts---Record transpired that eyewitnesses were residents of a vicinity situated 30/32 kilometres away from the place of incident---Eye-witnesses, in circumstances, should not have been present at the crime scene as per their daily routine---Two days before the occurrence, marriage ceremony of brother of complainant took place, hence, it appeared more improbable for them to be present at the place of occurrence---Said aspect would go long way in making all the said eye-witnesses as chance witnesses---Eye-witnesses, in order to justify their presence at the crime scene had come forward with the stance that in the earlier hours of the day, complainant received a telephonic message from the deceased, whereby she complained about a maltreatment in the form of physical torture and apprehension of her death from the hands of accused---Call was received by complainant at about 8.00 a.m., whereas the witnesses made it to the crime spot at about 9.00 a.m. on their bicycles---Keeping in view the intervening distance between the place of abode of witnesses and the house of deceased as 30/32 kilometres, it did not appear to be even a remotely possible to make it and that too on…
🔒
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