Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1408 2023 SLD 1408 2023 SCMR 1097
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Jail Petition No. 148 of 2022, decided on 11th April, 2023. Date of hearing: 11th April, 2023. (On appeal against the judgment Dated 15.02.2022 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Criminal Revision No. 205 of 2021)
Present: Munib Akhtar and Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, JJ
Junaid Iftikhar Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Anis Muhammad Shahzad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Sarwar Sidhu, Additional P.G. for the State.

MUHAMMAD USMAN---Petitioner

VERSUS

The STATE-----Respondent.

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 324,337-F(iii)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 324 & 337-F(iii)---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah-hashimah---Reappraisal of evidence---FIR was lodged on the same day i.e. just after one hour of the occurrence---Thus, it can safely be said that FIR was lodged with promptitude---Promptness of FIR showed truthfulness of the prosecution case and it excluded possibility of deliberation and consultation---Ocular account in the case has been furnished by complainant and two other prosecution witnesses---Said prosecution 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 had given 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---Ocular account furnished by the prosecution was reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring---Medical evidence available on the record further corroborated the ocular account so far as the nature, time, locale and impact of the injuries on the person of injured was concerned---Complainant had received injury at the hands of the accused and his testimony as well as the stamp of injury on his person clearly proved his presence at the place of occurrence---Complainant and another prosecution witness were the inmates of the house where the occurrence took place, therefore, both said witnesses were the most natural witnesses---Defence did not seriously dispute the motive part of the prosecution story---In these circumstances, there was sufficient evidence available on the record to sustain conviction of the accused---Conviction of accused under sections 324 & 337-F(v), P.P.C. was maintained---Jail petition was converted into appeal and partly allowed. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 324---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd---Recovery of weapon from accused---Reliance---Where the weapon of offence is recovered from the accused but the same is not sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, such recovery is inconsequential. (c) Penal Code (XLV…
🔒
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