| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1563 2021 SLD 1563 2021 YLR 1410 |
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 77 and Murder Reference No. 4 of 2019, decided on 3rd January, 2020, Date of hearing: 19th June, 2019.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JUSTICE, ROZI KHAN BARRECH, JUSTICE
Aminullah Kakar for Appellant. Faizullah Khan Kakar for the Complainant. Habibullah Gul, Additional Prosecutor General ("A.P.G.") for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 77 and Murder Reference No. 4 of 2019, decided on 3rd January, 2020, Date of hearing: 19th June, 2019.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JUSTICE, ROZI KHAN BARRECH, JUSTICE
Aminullah Kakar for Appellant. Faizullah Khan Kakar for the Complainant. Habibullah Gul, Additional Prosecutor General ("A.P.G.") for the State.
MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ
VS
The STATE
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular and medical evidence--- Corroboration--- Sentence, reduction in---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Record showed that in the crime report, complainant had specifically nominated the accused for making firing upon deceased---First Information Report was lodged promptly---Name of son of deceased as witness was mentioned in the report, that at the time of occurrence he was with the deceased---Said witness further added that the accused had run away towards road and in the meanwhile a witness also arrived and took the deceased to hospital in a vehicle---Said witness narrated the whole story with regard to the occurrence and had correctly stated the date, time, place and manner in which the occurrence had taken place---Another witness was an eye-witness of the occurrence and stated the same story which was narrated by son of deceased---Said witnesses attributed the role of firing to the accused and gave consistent, natural and straightforward ocular account of the occurrence---Defence subjected them to lengthy cross-examination, but their testimony remained unshaken and un-shattered---Nothing was in cross-examination to show that the accused was falsely implicated in the case---Presence of the said witnesses on the spot was proved---Investigating Officer had recorded statement of the said witnesses soon after the occurrence---Testimony of the eye-witnesses was duly corroborated by the recovery of blood-stained clothes of the deceased---Medical evidence produced by the prosecution supported and corroborated testimony of the eye-witnesses and no contradiction could be pointed out by the defence---Parties were known to each other previously and the question of mistaken identity of the real culprits did not arise and it was hard to believe that both the witnesses and even the complainant would substitute the real culprits with the accused---No motive had been set up by the prosecution---Absence of the motive would not affect the prosecution case nor would cast any shadow of doubt on the prosecution case---Both the prosecution…
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