Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1951 2022 SLD 1951 2022 PLJ 584
Lahore High Court
Crl. A. No. 70-J of 2015, heard on 20.12.2021. hearing date: 20.12.2021.
SHEHRAM SARWAR CH., J.
Mr. Ali Afzal Sahi, Advocte/Defence Counsel for Appellant. Mr. Muhammad Ahmad Saeed, Deputy prosecutor General for State. Nemo for Complainant.

SAFDAR ALI alias SUBTAIN

VS

STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b),148,149

Medical evidence-- ----Medical evidence is merely a supportive piece of evidence and relevant only if primary evidence i.e. ocular account inspires confidence which is not situation in this case--Evidence furnished by above said PWs is shaky in nature and cannot be relied upon for maintaining conviction/ sentence of appellant.[P. 588] A Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 149--Sentence--Challenge to--Delay of 2 hours--No cogent evidence qua motive part of incident--Beyond any shadow of doubt--Held: It is, by now well established principle of law that it is prosecution, which has to prove its case against accused by standing on its own legs and it cannot take any benefit from weaknesses of case of defence--It is also well established that if there is a single circumstance which creates doubt regarding prosecution case, same is sufficient to give benefit of doubt to accused, whereas, instant case is replete with number of circumstances which have created serious doubt about prosecution story.[P. 588] B C JUDGMENT Safdar Ali alias Subtain (appellant) alongwith his co-accused namely Imtiaz, Shahbaz Ahmad and Gulzar Ahmad was tried by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaranwala in a private complaint under Sections 302, 148 and 149, PPC instituted by Ameer Ali, complainant being dissatisfied with the investigation conducted by policein case FIR No. 342 dated 17.05.2011, offence under Sections 302, 148 and 149, PPC, registered at Police Station Satiana District Faisalabad. Vide judgment dated 24.02.2015 passed by learned trial court, the appellant has been convicted under Section 202(b), PPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life R.I., with a further direction to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakh only) as compensation under Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure, to the legal heirs of deceased and in default whereof to further undergo six months S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was extended to him. Through the same judgment, learned trial Court acquitted Imtiaz, Shahbaz Ahmad and Gulzar Ahmad co-accused of the appellant by extending them benefit of doubt and no appeal against their acquittal was filed by the complainant. Assailing the…
🔒
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