Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 750 2021 SLD 750 2021 PCRLJ 348
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 130-B of 2014 with Murder Reference No.11-B of 2018, decided on 16th June, 2020, Date of hearing:16th June, 2020.
ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, JUSTICE, SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JUSTICE
Syed Abdul Fayaz and Zahir Shah Marwat for Appellant.Arshad Ahmad, AAG for the State.Ghulam Mohyuddin Malik for the Complainant.

ABDUL BASIT VSTHE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),324,34

(a) Criminal trial--- ----Witness---Testimony of close relative---Scope---Conviction could be recorded on the basis of evidence of close relatives provided their testimony was trustworthy, confidence inspiring and corroborated by strong independent circumstances of the case. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular and medical evidence---Contradiction---Effect---Accused was charged that he and co-accused committed murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive behind the incident was stated to be dispute between the parties due to strained relations of accused with his wife---Ocular account of the occurrence had been furnished by father, brother and sister of the deceased---Complainant reiterated the same version as set forth by him in the initial report and introduced a lot of innovations about mode of occurrence, citing sister of deceased as eyewitness, arrangement of vehicle for shifting the deceased to the hospital coupled with addition of attributing two fire shots to each accused---Complainant in the initial report, had categorically and in unequivocal words mentioned that after receiving fire shot, the deceased succumbed to injury and died at the spot, whereas, according to Medical Officer, probable time elapsed between injury and death was 20 to 25 minutes, in that backdrop, complainant, in order to bring his testimony in line with the medical evidence, by making dishonest improvement in his court statement---Brother of deceased/witness deposed that after receiving injury deceased expired at the spot---Version of the complainant in the initial report about death of the deceased at the spot and that of witness was belied by the medical evidence---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused through cogent and confidence inspiring direct or circumstantial evidence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of…
🔒
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