Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1872 2022 SLD 1872 2022 PLJ 104
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
Crl. A. No. 382 of 2013, heard on 28.10.2021. hearing date: 28.10.2021.
SOHAIL NASIR, J.
Pirzada Niaz Mustafa Qureshi, Advocate for Appellant. M/s. Ghulam Shabbir Daku and Aurangzeb Ghuman, Advocates for Complainant. Mr. Muhammad Laeeq-ur-Rehman, Assistant District Public Prosecutor for State.

AZHAR ABBASS

VS

STATE and another

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 365-B,376

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 365-B 376--Sentence--Challenge to--Appreciation of evidence--Benefit of doubt--Statement of lady doctor was a final blow in prosecution’s story hence there was no good reason assigned by trial Court while convicting appellant--This is duty of prosecution under all circumstances to establish charge against accused beyond reasonable doubt otherwise accused has a right of acquittal not as a matter of premium concession but as a matter of right--Appeal allowed.[P. 107] A Pirzada Niaz Mustafa Qureshi, Advocate for Appellant. M/s. Ghulam Shabbir Daku and Aurangzeb Ghuman, Advocates for Complainant. Mr. Muhammad Laeeq-ur-Rehman, Assistant District Public Prosecutor for State. hearing date: 28.10.2021. JUDGMENT Azhar Abbass (appellant) along with Nagina Bibi was tried in case FIR No. 501 dated 02.10.2012 under Sections 365-B/376 PPC at Police Station Sadar Mianchannu District Khanewal on the complaint of Muhammad Ramzan (PW-2) and on conclusion thereof, vide judgment dated 25.06.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Mian Channu, Mst. Nagina Bibi was acquitted whereas appellant was convicted under Section 376 PPC and sentenced to undergo 14 years R.I with fine of Rs. 30,000/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to further undergo 6 months S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also extended to appellant. 2. Being aggrieved from the judgment of the learned trial Court appellant has approached this Court through the instant Criminal Appeal. 3. Learned counsel for appellant contends that prosecution’s story from the day one is contradictory hence there was no question at all to record the conviction by the learned trial Court. 4. Learned counsel for complainant does not dispute the contentions raised by learned counsel for appellant, however, the learned ADPP maintains that learned trial Court after appreciating entire evidence came to a right conclusion that prosecution has succeeded to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. 5. HEARD. 6. Facts of the case are that on 29.09.2012 Muhammad Ramzan (PW-1) moved an application (PA) to S.H.O where he maintained that on 26.09.2012 Robina Bibi (PW-3)…
🔒
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