Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1249 2023 SLD 1249 2023 PLJ 337
Islamabad High Court
J.A. No. 54 of 2021, decided on 6.2.2023. Date of hearing: 13.1.2023.
TARIQ MEHMOOD JAHANGIRI, J.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

HUSSAIN SHAH---Appellant

VS

STATE--Respondent

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 376(1)

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 376(1)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Most important factor is statement of victim recorded u/S. 164 Cr.P.C, wherein victim has categorically stated that when she informed her parents regarding alleged occurrence, parents of accused called, a “Jirga” was conducted and it was decided that sister of accused will be taken but uncle of accused refused--Motive behind registration of instant case seems to be failure of implementation of decisions of Jirga, wherein it was decided that sister of accused will marry with complainant, so this fact has demolished whole story of case--The prosecution case has become doubtful and motivated--There is absolutely no evidence on record of any struggle having taken place, nor were marks of any injury found on person either of victim or of accused, therefore, rape has not been proved to have been committed upon prosecutrix--Conviction u/S. 376(1) is concerned, question of age of girl is always becomes of greater importance but in instant case, there is no evidence that girl is under-age neither victim herself nor her father, mother or doctor stated said fact in their evidence--The important question that victim was under-age has never been put to accused in statement recorded u/S. 342 Cr.P.C--even said allegation has not been made in charge framed by Court--Age of victim is mentioned as 16 years in Medico Legal Report however, no reasons whatsoever have been mentioned that on basis of which evidence, said age was written--Statement of victim is not supported by report of DNA as well as by MLR or statement recorded by doctor that no mark of any injury on her body was found; she herself washed clothes and remained silent for 04 days in a small house where she was living with her parents, four brothers and two sisters--As important questions of underage and opinion of gynecologist etc. were not put to petitioner/accused in statement recorded u/S. 342 Cr.P.C., conviction cannot be based upon said evidence--Prosecution has failed to prove its case against appellant beyond a reasonable doubt--There are so many defects and contradictions in prosecution case/evidence; thus,…
🔒
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