| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1485 2021 SLD 1485 2021 YLR 808 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. S-179 of 2016, decided on 15th May,2020, Date of hearing: 29th April, 2020.
MUHAMMAD SALEEM, JESSAR, JUSTICE
Faisal Ali Raza Bhatti for Appellant.Shewak Rathore, D.P.G. Sindh for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. S-179 of 2016, decided on 15th May,2020, Date of hearing: 29th April, 2020.
MUHAMMAD SALEEM, JESSAR, JUSTICE
Faisal Ali Raza Bhatti for Appellant.Shewak Rathore, D.P.G. Sindh for the State.
TAIMOORVSTHE STATE
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 376(1),34
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 376(1) 34---Rape, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused were charged for gang-rape with complainant---Record showed that complainant in her evidence exonerated the co-accused---During her statement, complainant deposed that accused present in the court was same person---Co-accused present in the court was not the same---Unknown culprit, who committed the offence at the time of incident, was not present---Consequently, complainant was declared hostile and was cross-examined---Such fact created doubt about the veracity of prosecution case---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Witness--- Hostile witness--- Scope---Evidence of hostile witness was also to be considered like evidence of any other prosecution witness but evidence of such witness required strong corroboration through other pieces of evidence. Abdul Wahid Bhurt and another v. Ashraf and 4 others 2019 YLR 487 rel. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 376(1) 34---Rape, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses--- Scope--- Accused were charged for committing gang-rape with complainant---Record showed that the complainant/alleged victim had deposed that all the accused were empty handed, whereas her mother/ alleged eye-witness in her examination-in-chief deposed that accused was holding pistol---Complainant/alleged victim in her cross-examination admitted that she and her mother were awakening at the time when accused knocked their door, whereas according to her mother/witness, she and her daughter were sleeping and woke up on knocking of door---Besides, mother of victim/ witness stated that they inquired and reply came likewise of her son then her daughter opened door---On the other hand, complainant/victim had not said a single word about making any inquiry from the person(s) who knocked the door and that voice of the person who replied was similar to that of his brother---Victim simply said that when they heard sound of knocking their outer door then she went and opened the door---According to complainant/alleged victim, absconded…
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