| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 81 2021 SLD 81 2021 SCMR 149 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 255 of 2020, decision Dated: 27th October, 2020, hearing Date : 27th October, 2020. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.1.2016 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Crl. A. 160-A/2010 and Crl. R. No. 07-A/2012)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Mrs. Kausar Iqbal Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court
Criminal Appeal No. 255 of 2020, decision Dated: 27th October, 2020, hearing Date : 27th October, 2020. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.1.2016 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Crl. A. 160-A/2010 and Crl. R. No. 07-A/2012)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Mrs. Kausar Iqbal Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court
GHULAM MURTAZA
VS
THE STATE
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),459
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) 459---Qatl-i-amd, hurt caused, whilst committing lurking house-trespass or house-breaking---Reappraisal of evidence---Accused was the only person nominated in the FIR by the complainant, and he had been attributed the role of effective firing at the deceased---Eye-witness of the case was an inmate of the house, where the occurrence took place, therefore her presence at the spot was natural and could not be doubted---Evidence of said eye-witness found corroboration from the contents of the FIR and the site plan, which was prepared on her pointation, wherefrom the crime empties and blood-stained clothes were recovered by the investigating officer---Said eye-witness was subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing detrimental to the case of the prosecution was found in her statement---Medical evidence also supported the prosecution version---Besides the crime empties, the weapon of offence was recovered from the possession of the accused, and the forensic report in regard to the weapon was positive---Appeal was dismissed and conviction and sentences passed against the accused were maintained. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Related witness, evidence of---Scope---Mere relationship of a witness with the victim would not discard his/her evidence if it was otherwise confidence inspiring and trustworthy. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) 459---Qatl-i-amd, hurt caused, whilst committing lurking house-trespass or house-breaking---Reappraisal of evidence---Sentence, quantum of---Mitigating circumstances---Motive for the occurrence was not established from the record---Question as to what happened prior to the scene of occurrence or what prompted the accused to take away the life of the deceased were circumstances which had rightly been considered by the Courts below as mitigating circumstances and thus, the accused was rightly sentenced to imprisonment for life instead of death---Appeal was dismissed. JUDGMENT MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE:---.--- The appellant-Ghulam Murtaza was booked in case FIR No.343 dated 17.08.2010 registered under sections 302/324/452 of the…
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