Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1323 2020 SLD 1323 2020 YLR 827
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 2190 of 2016 and Murder Reference No. 2 of 2017, heard on 25-11-2019, hearing Date : 25-11-2019.
SHEHRAM SARWAR CH. AND FAROOQ HAIDER, JJ
Rafique Javed Butt for Appellants. Rai Akhtar Hussain, Deputy Prosecutor General for State. Imran Ahmad Malik for the Complainant.

WAZIRISTAN KHAN AND OTHERS

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence--- Opinion of medical expert---Time of death---Determination---Complainant lodged FIR against accused persons for committing qatl-i-amd of his father due to longstanding enmity---Opinion of expert was to be based upon settled principles on the subject and examined carefully on touchstone of said principles---If the opinion was found contrary to said principles, then it would be taken ipse dixit and court could make its opinion while preferring the settled principles---Doctor who conducted post-mortem examination of both deceased persons opined that probable time between death and post mortem was five to six hours but had found that rigor mortis had developed---Such opinion regarding duration of time between death and post mortem was not tallying with time usually consumed for reaching rigor mortis to 'developed stage'---Prosecution failed to prove its case against accused persons, in circumstances---High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused persons by Trial Court and acquitted them of the charge---Appeal was allowed. Parikh's Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology and Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology ref. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Medical evidence--- Evidentiary value---Medical evidence is merely a supportive/confirmatory type of evidence which can tell about locale, nature, magnitude of injury and kind of weapon used for causing injury but not about identity of assailant who caused the injury. Sajjan Solangi v. The State 2019 SCMR 872 rel. (c) Criminal trial--- ----Motive---Nature of evidence---Motive is merely corroborative piece of evidence and when ocular account has not been believed, then it loses its significance---Motive is double-edged weapon and same can also be considered as reason for false involvement---Single dent in case of prosecution is sufficient for acquittal. Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345; Mst. Asia Bibi v. The State and others PLD 2019 SC 64 and Abdul Jabbar and another v. The State 2019 SCMR 129 rel. JUDGMENT FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE:---.--- Through this single consolidated judgment Criminal Appeal…
🔒
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