Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1046 2023 PCRLJ 823 2023 SLD 1046
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 118-A of 2019, decided on 18th May, 2022. Date of hearing: 18th May, 2022.
WIQAR AHMAD AND KAMRAN HAYAT MIANKHEL, JJ

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

NOOR-UR-REHMAN

VS

The STATE and another

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(c)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence---Specific plea of self defence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive was stated to be entrance of deceased at the house of accused for search of his pigeons---Accused had taken specific plea of self defence and even otherwise if accused had not taken plea of self defence in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C., but if the circumstances of the case and the evidence so produced reflected that the accused acted in self-defence the benefit could be extended to him---Appeal was partially allowed. Ghulam Farid v. The State 2009 SCMR 929 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Plea taken by the accused in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive was stated to be entrance of deceased at the house of accused for search of his pigeons---Accused had taken specific plea in his statements under S. 342, Cr.P.C., that in his self defence he made firing upon the deceased---Though the accused acted in his defence but had exceeded what was required for his defence---Accused should have made aerial shot instead of directly firing upon the deceased---No doubt, the accused had not repeated and only one fire shot had been made which hit the deceased on his right thigh---Complainant as well as the eye-witness during course of cross-examination admitted to be correct that there was no previous enmity between them meaning thereby that if the deceased had not entered in the house of accused no offence would have been taken place---Record depicted that deceased had himself committed illegal trespass in the house of accused---Accused was living alone with his two daughters and the illegal trespass of the deceased annoyed the accused and thus resulted in the present occurrence---Moreover, the fire was made at the non-vital part of the deceased and after making firing from shotgun the accused had…
🔒
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