Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 866 2022 SLD 866 2022 MLD 697
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No.88-J of 2015, heard on 17-08-2021,hearing date: 17-08-2021
SOHAIL NASIR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: James Joseph Ansar Yasin, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.

MUHAMMAD UMARVSTHE STATE AND 2 OTHErs

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss.302(b) , 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Medical and ocular account---Contradictions---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the father of complainant by firing---Medical Officer who conducted the post-mortem examination of deceased found two injuries on his body---In cross-examination, said Medical Officer admitted that blackening was caused as a result of fire shot when the victim was at a three feet distance from the assailant---Complainant facing the challenge of cross-questioning categorically replied that the distance between his father and assailant was 2 karams when his father received the fire shot---Admittedly, 2 karams meant fourteen feet---In scaled site plan the distance between deceased and accused had been mentioned as three karams at the time of firing. which was not disputed as 16.5 feet---Serious contrast existed in medical and ocular account of the case---Circumstances established that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Barkat Ali v. Muhammad Asif and others 2007 SCMR 1812; Amin Ali and another v. The State 2011 SCMR 323; Muhammad Zaman v. The State and others 2014 SCMR 749 and Muhammad Mehboob v. The State 2021 SCMR 366 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---Ss.302(b) , 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of eyewitnesses---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the father of complainant by firing---Record showed that the police station was at a distance of about seven kilometres from crime scene---Real father of complainant and brother-in-law of eyewitness was shot dead by accused at about 05:30 p.m. but before arrival of police---None of them or any other person present at crime scene bothered to inform the Police---Said fact was admitted by complainant without any reservation in cross-examination while replying that neither he nor eyewitness or his brother reported the matter to the police---Complainant had shown his…
🔒
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