Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 320,337-A(i)(ii)(iii),337-F,337-G,279

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 117,120

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 320, 337-A (i) (ii) (iii), 337-F, 337-G & 279---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.342---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120---Qatl-i-Khata, Shajjah-i-Khafifa, Shajjah-i-Hashimah, Shajjah-i-Mudihah, Ghayr-Jaifah, rash and negligent driving---Appreciation of evidence---Rash and negligent driving---Onus to prove---Plea of accused---Effect---Accused while driving a vehicle caused accident which resulted into death of three persons---Trial Court convicted the accused for Qatl-i-Khata and causing injuries by driving rash and negligently---Trial Court did not discuss statements of prosecution witnesses and convicted accused on the basis of his reply to a question put to him under S. 342 Cr.P.C.---Prosecution was to prove guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt---Judgment of Trial Court was based on statement of accused recorded under S.342 Cr.P.C. and that on physical examination of the vehicle of which tie-rod was not found broken---First Information Report was registered on 6.1.2016 while vehicle was produced by prosecution witness in Court on 3.10.2016, which remained parked with concerned police station---No report of Motor mechanic was produced to prove that vehicle was checked after accident---High Court observed that when law had provided a thing to be done the same had to be done in that particular manner---Trial Court was to first discuss the case in order to come to an independent conclusion with regard to truthfulness of prosecution witnesses then to examine statement of accused under S. 342 Cr.P.C.---If the Court had disbelieved prosecution evidence then it should have accepted the statement of accused as a whole with certainty---None of the ocular witnesses supported prosecution case---Mere driving in high speed did not constitute the offence where element of negligence was lacking---High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused by Trial Court and he was acquitted of the charge---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Hashim Qasim v. The State 2017 SCMR 986; Wajahat Ahmed v. The State 2016 SCMR 2073 and Yasir Arafat v. The State 2012 MLD 611 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ABDUL…

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