| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 693 2020 SLD 693 2020 SCMR 597 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 29-P of 2012 and Jail Petition No. 76 of 2012, decision & hearing Dated: 25-09-2017. (On appeal against the judgment Dated 23.02.2012 passed by Peshawar High Court, Mingora bench (Dar-ul-Qaza) Swat in Crl. Appeal No. 603 of 2009)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Altaf Samad, Advocate Supreme Court (in both cases).
Respondent(s) by: Nemo (in both cases).
Criminal Petition No. 29-P of 2012 and Jail Petition No. 76 of 2012, decision & hearing Dated: 25-09-2017. (On appeal against the judgment Dated 23.02.2012 passed by Peshawar High Court, Mingora bench (Dar-ul-Qaza) Swat in Crl. Appeal No. 603 of 2009)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Altaf Samad, Advocate Supreme Court (in both cases).
Respondent(s) by: Nemo (in both cases).
FARMAN ALI AND ANOTHERS
VS
THE STATE AND ANOTHER
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---In the FIR, it was specifically mentioned that the accused and co-accused fired at the deceased and due to their firing, the deceased received fire shots and succumbed to the injures---Names of the eyewitnesses had specifically been mentioned in the FIR---Matter was promptly reported to the police and the postmortem was also conducted promptly, which excluded the possibility of consultation or deliberation on the part of the prosecution---Ocular account which otherwise was trustworthy was fully supported by the medical evidence so far as injuries received by the deceased and time of occurrence etc, were concerned---No contradiction were found between the ocular account and the medical evidence---Ocular account was further corroborated by the abscondence of the accused as he remained fugitive from law and had to be declared a proclaimed offender---Likewise the co-accused was arrested 25/26 days after the incident---Non-dispatching of the empties to the firearm expert was not fatal to the prosecution case as no weapon was recovered during investigation of the case---Sentences of imprisonment for life awarded to accused persons were maintained---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Eye-witnesses, testimony of---Though eye-witnesses of the occurrence were related to the deceased but they had no ill will or motive to falsely implicate the accused persons---Said witnesses remained consistent on each and every material point despite lengthy cross-examination and both the Courts below, after appraisal of the evidence, found them truthful and reliable witnesses---No material discrepancy or improvement was found in their statements---Sentences of imprisonment for life awarded to accused persons were maintained---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Eye-witnesses not attributing specific injuries to each accused person---Immaterial---In the present case, when three persons started firing upon one…
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