| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2184 2023 SLD 2184 2023 MLD 1864 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 701, Criminal Jail Appeals Nos. 697 of 2021 and 20 of 2022, decided on 1st December, 2022.
Before Irshad Ali Shah, J
Dilawar Hussain, K.D. Sangi and Habib-ur-Rehman Jiskani for Appellants. Ms. Rubina Qadir, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 701, Criminal Jail Appeals Nos. 697 of 2021 and 20 of 2022, decided on 1st December, 2022.
Before Irshad Ali Shah, J
Dilawar Hussain, K.D. Sangi and Habib-ur-Rehman Jiskani for Appellants. Ms. Rubina Qadir, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh for the State.
JAVED SHAH and others---Appellants
VERSUS
The STATE and others---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),34
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Inconsistency between evidence of Investigating Officer and three prosecution witnesses with regard to the arrest of accused---Accused/wife of deceased was charged for committing murder of her husband/brother of the complainant in collusion with other accused by administering some intoxicant substance to him---Record showed that evidence of a witness was only to the extent that he was intimated about the death of the deceased by the other witness, who happened to be son of the deceased---Evidence of the complainant and a witness, prima facie, suggested that they were not eye-witnesses to the incident as such their evidence could hardly lend support to the case of prosecution---Investigating Officer stated that on 14.03.2018, he apprehended accused/wife of the deceased---However, as per other witnesses, said accused was apprehended on 13.03.2018---No one knew what happened in between---However, inconsistency between evidence of Investigating Officer and three prosecution witnesses with regard to the arrest of accused could not be lost sight of---Circumstances established that the prosecution had not been able to prove the involvement of the accused persons in commission of incident beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 39---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Admission of accused before police---Not admissible---Accused/wife of deceased was charged for committing murder of her husband/brother of the complainant in collusion with other accused by administering some intoxicant substance to him---Investigating Officer stated that during course of inquiry, it was disclosed to him by accused/wife of deceased that she and other accused persons had committed the murder of the deceased by strangulating his throat after administering some intoxicant substance to him as she intended to marry the other accused---Surprisingly, on chemical examination, no intoxicant…
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