Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 2389 2023 SLD 2389 2023 PCRLJ 1578
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. (s) 7 and Murder Reference No. (s) 1 of 2022, decided on 30th March, 2023.Date of hearing: 21st March, 2023.
Before Zaheer-ud-Din Kakar and Gul Hassan Tareen, JJ
Hasnain Iqbal Minhas for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. (s) 7 of 2022). Jamil Akhtar Gajani, Additional Prosecutor General for the State (in Criminal Appeal No. (s) 7 of 2022). Jamil Akhtar Gajani, Additional Prosecutor General for Appellant (in Murder

MUHAMMAD AZEEM and others---Appellants

VS

The STATE---Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),324,147,148,149

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 147, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Night time occurrence--- Source of light i.e. bulb not secured during investigation---Accused were charged for making firing upon the complainant party, due to which the brother and mother of the complainant died while complainant and his brother were grievously hurt---According to the report of complainant, the incident took place at 02:00 a.m. in odd hours of night---Complainant alleged that he identified the accused persons and unknown accused in the light of electricity bulbs---Accused were roped in the case on the basis of their identification by the complainant and the eye-witnesses through the said source of light---However, the record revealed that the said source of light was not taken into possession by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation---According to Investigating Officer, he visited the site and sketched a rough site plan---Perusal of site plan did not reveal the existence of electricity bulbs at the scene of occurrence---In this case the existence of the light of electricity bulbs at the time and place of incident was a relevant fact but the prosecution had failed to secure such piece of evidence during the course of investigation---As such, the identification of the accused persons by the complainant as well as by the eye-witness at the scene of occurrence was not beyond shadow of doubt rather created a reasonable doubt in a prudent mind---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt--- Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed. Sardar Bibi and another v. Munir Ahmed and others 2017 SCMR 344 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 147, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of crime weapon on the instance of accused---Doubtful---Accused were charged for making…
🔒
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