| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2286 2023 SLD 2286 2023 YLR 1967 |
Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench
Criminal Appeal No. 254-A of 2021, decided on 27th March, 2023.Date of hearing: 28th February, 2022.
Before Wiqar Ahmad and Kamran Hayat Miankhel, JJ
Javed Khan Tanali for Appellant. Sajid-ur-Rehman Khan, Assistant A.G. for the State. Naseer Ahmad Khan Tanoli for the Complainant.
Criminal Appeal No. 254-A of 2021, decided on 27th March, 2023.Date of hearing: 28th February, 2022.
Before Wiqar Ahmad and Kamran Hayat Miankhel, JJ
Javed Khan Tanali for Appellant. Sajid-ur-Rehman Khan, Assistant A.G. for the State. Naseer Ahmad Khan Tanoli for the Complainant.
IQBAL KHAN---Appellant
VERSUS
Mst. SHEHNAZ BIBI and another---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S.302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of eye-witnesses at the spot proved---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing during an altercation---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by two eye-witnesses---Record showed that presence of eye-witness had been mentioned by complainant while lodging first report of the occurrence---Inquest report also indicated his presence at the time of handing over dead body of the deceased at the hospital---In the site plan, Investigating Officer of the case had also marked his presence---Site plan had also been prepared on joint pointation of both the eye-witnesses---Statement of one of the eye-witnesses had been recorded under S. 161, Cr.P.C. on the first day of occurrence while statement of other eye-witness had been recorded by the Investigating Officer on second day of occurrence---In such circumstances, mere omission to name the other eye-witness in S. 161, Cr.P.C. statement of eye-witness would not make much difference---Statement of other eye-witness had also remained fully consistent and confidence inspiring---Presence of both the eye-witnesses stood well established---Testimonies of said witnesses had also remained consistent inter se regarding the mode and manner of occurrence---Same was also corroborated by arrest of the accused on the day of occurrence along with a licensed .30-bore pistol recovered vide recovery memo---Two empties of .30-bore, recovered vide recovery memo. from the spot, had also been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for the purpose of comparison, and report received there from was in affirmative providing sufficient corroboration to case of prosecution--- Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Substitution unlikely--- Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing during an altercation---Record showed that it was a case of single accused to whom…
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