| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1261 2021 SLD 1261 2021 MLD 972 |
Balochistan High Court, Sibi Bench
Criminal Appeal No. (S)26 of 2020, decided on 14th October, 2020, Date of hearing: 23rd September, 2020.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR AND ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, JJ
Mehmood Ali Butt for Petitioner. Jamil Akhtar Gajani, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. (S)26 of 2020, decided on 14th October, 2020, Date of hearing: 23rd September, 2020.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR AND ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, JJ
Mehmood Ali Butt for Petitioner. Jamil Akhtar Gajani, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.
ALLAH BAKHSH
VS
THE STATE
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),34
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss.302(b) 34Qatliamd, common intentionAppreciation of evidenceBenefit of doubtContradictions in the statements of witnessesScopeAccused was charged that he along with his coaccused committed murder of the brother of the complainantMotive was alleged to be previous enmity between the partiesRecord showed that the complainant in crossexamination stated that he left his brother in injured condition and went to police station for registration of FIRIn crossexamination the witness replied that he returned back in half an hour to the place of occurrence and his brother was deadWitness in his deposition contradicted the complainantWitness stated that he and other witness shifted the injured from the place of occurrenceInjured died near the hospitalWitness replied that when the complainant came back he was present at the spotPolice reached the spot before shifting the injured to hospitalWitness stated that he, complainant and other witness had taken the injured to hospital, but before reaching hospital the injured diedStatements of the witnesses were not in line rather contradicting each otherSuch glaring contradictions could not be ignoredAppeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Muhammad Jabran v. The State 2020 SCMR 1493 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss.302(b) 34Qatliamd, common intentionAppreciation of evidenceBenefit of doubtNo justification available for presence of witnesses at the place of occurrenceUnnatural conduct of the complainantScopeAccused was charged that he along with his coaccused committed murder of the brother of the complainantIn the present case, the conduct of the complainant was unnaturalDeceased was brother of the complainant, who due to firing sustained injuries and was in critical condition, but the complainant left the injured at the spot and went for registration of FIRHuman conduct was that firstly tried to shift the injured to hospital in order to provide medical treatmentFrom the conduct of the witnesses it could be judged that they were not present at the spotTwo armed persons fired upon deceased but did not harm the brother of the deceased and other eyewitnessesCircumstances established…
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