Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 3094 2022 SLD 3094 2022 YLR 1345
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 83917, 83916 and Murder Reference No. 477 of 2017, heard on 9th March, 2021.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN AND SHEHRAM SARWAR CH., JJ
Malik Matee Ullah for Appellants. Zafar Abbas Khan for the Complainant. Munir Ahmad Sial, D.P.G. for the State.

MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others

VS

The STATE

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302,324,337-A(i),337-A(iv),337-A(vi),337 -D,148,149

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 337-A(i), 337-A(iv), 337-A(vi), 337-D, 148 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, Shajjah-i-munaqqilah, causing shajjah-i-damighah, jaifah, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that the accused party while armed with deadly weapons made indiscriminate firing upon the complainant, due to which nephew of complainant died while his brother was seriously injured---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by the complainant and injured witness---Both the said eye-witnesses stated in their statements regarding roles of the accused that accused made fire shot with Kalashnikov which hit on the left side of abdomen of injured witness---Second fire shot made by him hit on the right cheek of deceased---Co-accused made fire shot of Kalashnikov which hit deceased on his back---Other co-accused persons had also been attributed firearm injuries on the persons of deceased and injured, who had been acquitted by the trial court by disbelieving evidence of both the said eye-witnesses--- Complainant/State had not filed any appeal against their acquittal---Same evidence could not be believed to the extent of the accused persons in absence of independent corroborative piece of evidence which was conspicuously missing in the present case---Motive was not attributed to the accused rather was attributed to co-accused who had died---Recovery of Kalashnikovs on pointing out of the accused persons in presence of negative report of Forensic Science Agency was not only inconsequential but also drew adverse inference--- Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond any reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Shahbaz v. The State 2016 SCMR 1763 rel. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Principle---If there was circumstance which created reasonable doubt in the prudent mind about the guilt of the accused, then he would be entitled to its benefit not as a matter of grace and concession, but as of right. Muhammad Akram…
🔒
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