| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1881 2021 SLD 1881 2021 PLJ 774 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. A. No. 1008 & M.R No. 403 of 2016, decided on 1.10.2019, Date of hearing: 1.10.2019.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE, SHEHRAM SARWAR CH., JUSTICE.
Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari, Ms. Khalida Parveen and Sheeba Qaiser, Advocates for Appellant. Mr. Humayoun Aslam, Deputy Prosecutor General for State. Malik Muhammad Siddique Awan, Advocate for Complainant.
Crl. A. No. 1008 & M.R No. 403 of 2016, decided on 1.10.2019, Date of hearing: 1.10.2019.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE, SHEHRAM SARWAR CH., JUSTICE.
Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari, Ms. Khalida Parveen and Sheeba Qaiser, Advocates for Appellant. Mr. Humayoun Aslam, Deputy Prosecutor General for State. Malik Muhammad Siddique Awan, Advocate for Complainant.
NIAZ AHMAD
VS
STATE
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b)
Motive-- ----It is well established by now that motive is a double edged weapon because if it could be a reason for commission of crime, then at same time, it could prompt complainant’s side for false implication of an accused, therefore, motive alone an neither prove nor disprove a crime and same has “to be weighed with other attending circumstances of case. Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 302(b)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Qatl-e-amd--Benefit of doubt--Motive behind occurrence as alleged by prosecution was to effect that about eight months prior to incident, caused injuries to wife of complainant and her maternal uncle which resulted in fracture of his leg--Cousin of complainant got registered case bearing FIR against accused--Medical evidence produced by prosecution was not of much avail to prosecution because murder in issue had remained unwitnessed and thus medical evidence could not point an accusing finger towards any of culprits implicated in this case--Prosecution could not’ prove its case against appellant beyond any shadow of doubt--It is, by now well established principle of law that it is prosecution, which has to prove its case against accused by standing on its own legs and it cannot take any benefit from weaknesses of case of defence--Prosecution remained failed to discharge its responsibility of proving case against appellant--Held: It is also well established that if there is a single circumstance which creates doubt regarding prosecution case, same is sufficient to give benefit of doubt to accused, whereas, instant case is replete with number of circumstances which have created serious doubt about prosecution story--Appeal was allowed. 2016 SCMR 1605 and 2009 SCMR 230. JUDGMENT Shehram Sarwar Ch., JUSTICE.- Niaz Ahmad (appellant) along with his co-accused namely Alam Shair, Allah Rakha and Aman Ullah alias Dosa was tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Tandlianwala District Faisalabad in case FIR No. 200 dated 14.04.2015, offence under Sections 302 and 34 PPC registered at Police Station Sadar Tandlianwala District Faisalabad for the murder of Mst. Irshad Bibi (deceased) mother of complainant. Vide judgment…
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