Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,302,324,337A(i),337-F(i)

Law: Police Rules, 1934

Section: R.21

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

Section: 129(g)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 340(2),342,374,382B,544A

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 337-A(i), 337-F(i) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Night time occurrence---Source of light---Un-natural conduct of eye-witnesses---Scope---Prosecution case was that accused/appellants were on motorcycle with a goat, complainant party while finding them suspicious stopped them but they made firing upon the complainant party, due to which, complainant received injuries while his son died---Ocular account had been furnished by two eye-witnesses including complainant/injured---Though the firearm injuries on the person of complainant indicated his presence at the spot, however, same were not conclusive proof of what he deposed before the court was true---Record showed that complainant was asleep in his house and woke up at the time of incident on dogs barking---Complainant came out of the house and had seen a motorcycle coming from a distance of one square from eastern side which was statedly boarded by two persons who had loaded stolen goat upon it---Prosecution witnesses had canvassed that both the perpetrators were having chequered criminal track record of being involved in numerous criminal cases thus, when signalled to stop both of them fired from their respective weapons, leading to the death of son of complainant and injuries to complainant---Record transpired that neither during investigation any material was secured nor at trial any evidence was led from which it might be alluded that on the eventful night, any goat was stolen from the vicinity---No material was available on record to show that two accused/appellants were habitual thieves---Crime report showed that veil was lifted from the identification of both the appellants through torchlight, however, the frailty of such claim was probably felt by the witnesses as well and changed their stance during trial by saying that it was so done in the light of bulb and torch---Existence of electricity bulb at the scene of occurrence was not found mentioned in the site plan---Investigating Officer of the case, after his arrival in hospital,…

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