| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 1446 2023 SCMR 1375 2023 SLD 1446 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Jail Petition No. 206 of 2019, decided on 8th May, 2023.Date of hearing: 8th May, 2023. (On appeal against the judgment dated 11.03.2019 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Criminal Appeal No. 394 of 2018)
Present: Yahya Afridi and Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, JJ
Syeda B.H. Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Mirza Abid Majeed, D.P.G. for the State.
Jail Petition No. 206 of 2019, decided on 8th May, 2023.Date of hearing: 8th May, 2023. (On appeal against the judgment dated 11.03.2019 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Criminal Appeal No. 394 of 2018)
Present: Yahya Afridi and Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, JJ
Syeda B.H. Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Mirza Abid Majeed, D.P.G. for the State.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ---Petitioner
VS
The STATE---Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Incident took place at 02:30 p.m. whereas the matter was reported to the Police on the same day at 06:05 p.m.---Distance between the place of occurrence and the Police Station was 18 kilometers, thus, it could safely be said that FIR was lodged with promptitude---Complainant and another witness had heard the gunshot and witnessed the accused fleeing away from the place of occurrence after commission of offence with a pistol in his hands---Evidence of said witnesses was in the nature of wajtakar, the probative strength of which rested in the doctrine of res gestae in view of Article 19 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984---Said doctrine of res gestae was based upon the assumption that statements of witnesses that constituted part of the res gestae were attributed a certain degree of reliability because they were contemporaneous making them admissible by virtue of their nature and strength of their connection with a particular event and their ability to explain it comprehensively---Prosecution witnesses in question were residents of the same locality, therefore, their presence at the place of occurrence was natural---Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record---Said witnesses gave all necessary details of occurrence qua the date, time, place, name of accused, name of witnesses, manner of occurrence, kind of weapon used in the occurrence, the locale of injuries and the motive of occurrence---Accused could not point out any plausible reason as to why the complainant would falsely involve the accused in the present case and let off the real culprit, who had committed murder of his daughter---Substitution in such like cases was a rare phenomenon---Medical evidence available on the record further corroborated the prosecution case so far as the nature, time, locale and impact of the injuries on the person of the deceased was concerned---Accused remained absconder for a long period of more than five years, which was also a corroboratory piece of evidence…
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