| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1820 2021 SLD 1820 2021 PLJ 446 |
Peshawar High Court
Crl. A. No. 68-M & Crl. R. No. 18-M of 2018, decided on 15.10.2020, Date of hearing: 15.10.2020.
ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM, JUSTICE, WIQAR AHMAD, JUSTICE.
Mr. Sher Muhammad Khan, Advocate for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 68-M of 2018). Mr. Muhammad Rashid and Sabir Shah, Advocates for
Respondent (in Crl. A. No. 68-M of 2018). Mr. Muhammad Rashid and Sabir Shah, Advocates for
Respondent (in Crl. R. 18-M of 20
Crl. A. No. 68-M & Crl. R. No. 18-M of 2018, decided on 15.10.2020, Date of hearing: 15.10.2020.
ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM, JUSTICE, WIQAR AHMAD, JUSTICE.
Mr. Sher Muhammad Khan, Advocate for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 68-M of 2018). Mr. Muhammad Rashid and Sabir Shah, Advocates for
Respondent (in Crl. A. No. 68-M of 2018). Mr. Muhammad Rashid and Sabir Shah, Advocates for
Respondent (in Crl. R. 18-M of 20
NASEEB KHAN
VS
STATE THROUGH A.A.G. AND ANOTHER
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b)/34
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 186)-- ----Ss. 302(b)/34--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Qatl-e-amd--Benefit of doubt--Delay would naturally be fatal to case of prosecution, as it was not only delay simplicitor but preliminary investigations has also been taken before lodging of first report of occurrence--These contradictions have created doubt regarding presence of both these PWs on spot and to have seen occurrence--Substantial doubts have been lurking in case, prosecution have therefore failed to prove case against appellant beyond reasonable doubt--There is no doubt that abscondence of accused had been taken as a corroboratory circumstance in case, but when prosecution have failed to prove case against appellant beyond reasonable doubt, abscondence as a corroboratory piece of evidence would lose its significance--Lays down that occurring of minor contradictions in statements of PWs is natural, which may be ignored, but contradictions in case in hand have been found material, said s are therefore of no help to case of prosecution--Have not been of any help to case of complainant or prosecution as well--Benefit of even a single doubt is to be extended to accused wherever reasonably found in case of prosecution, as held by Hon’ble Apex Court is extended benefit of doubt and acquitted of the charges--Appeal was allowed. 2004 SCMR 1185, 2020 SCMR 857, 2001 SCMR 177, 2017 SCMR 1976, PLD 2007 SC 71, 2007 SCMR 1014, 2010 YLR 1125, 2005 SCMR 522, 2006 SCMR 261 and PLD 2019 SC 64 ref. JUDGMENT Wiqar Ahmad, JUSTICE. namely Naseeb Khan has called in question judgment of his conviction and sentence dated 28.03.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions-II Dir Upper, vide which he was sentenced as follows; - U/S. 302(b) PPC to life imprisonment along with payment of fine of Rs. 50,0001/- (fifty thousand), or in default thereof, he shall further undergo six months’ simple imprisonment. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 100,000/- (one hundred thousand) under Section 544-A Cr.P.C, payable to legal heirs of deceased, or in default thereof, to suffer one-year simple imprisonment. - U/S. 341 PPC to one-month simple imprisonment. - U/S. 427 PPC to six…
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