| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2791 2024 SLD 2791 2024 PCRLJ 229 |
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench
Criminal Appeal No. 171-M of 2021, decided on 31st January,2023.Date of hearing: 31st January, 2023.
Before Muhammad Naeem Anwar and Muhammad Ijaz Khan, JJ
Shams-ul-Hadi for Appellant. Haq Nawaz Khan, Assistant A.G. for the State. Umar Zaman Khan and Amjad Ali Zewar for
Respondent No. 1.
Criminal Appeal No. 171-M of 2021, decided on 31st January,2023.Date of hearing: 31st January, 2023.
Before Muhammad Naeem Anwar and Muhammad Ijaz Khan, JJ
Shams-ul-Hadi for Appellant. Haq Nawaz Khan, Assistant A.G. for the State. Umar Zaman Khan and Amjad Ali Zewar for
Respondent No. 1.
MUQADAR KHAN---Appellant
VS
The STATE and another---Respondents
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 46
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),324,337-F(i),34
(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 46---Dying declaration---Scope---Dying declaration is a weak type of evidence which requires deep scrutiny with great care and caution but on the other hand, dying declaration can be considered as substantive piece of evidence if the Court is satisfied about its genuineness---Thus, dying declaration is required to be considered on case-to-case basis in view of the attending circumstances of each case and, if found genuine, may be relied upon against accused. Farman Ullah v. Qadeem Khan and another 2001 SCMR 1474 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(ii) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah damihah, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---First Information Report lodged with promptitude---Accused was charged for firing upon complainant and his nephew with his pistol resulting into injuries on their bodies; injuries sustained by complainant proved fatal because of which he subsequently died---Occurrence took place on 03.09.2017 at 10:30 p.m. which was reported on the same date at 11:50 p.m., as such, the report was lodged with promptitude---Thus, there was no occasion for the deceased then injured either for consultation and deliberation or to record his report under the influence of someone else for implicating the accused in a false case, especially, when there was no previous blood feud or even a grudge between them---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly dismissed. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(ii) & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah damihah, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Dying declaration---Reliance---Accused was charged for firing upon complainant and his nephew with his pistol resulting into injuries on their bodies; injuries sustained by complainant proved fatal because of which he subsequently died---Record showed that the Murasila/dying declaration had been drafted on the report of deceased then injured---Not only said report…
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