| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2542 2024 SLD 2542 2024 YLR 270 |
Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahalwalpur
Criminal Appeals Nos. 52/BWP, 80/BWP and Murder ReferenceNo. 4 of 2014, hearad on 26th April, 2018*.Date of hearing:26th April, 2018.
Before Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan and Tariq Saleem Sheikh, JJ
Syed Zeeshan Haider for Appellant. Ch. Asghar Ali Gill, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State. Sadiq Mehmood Khurram for the Complainant.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 52/BWP, 80/BWP and Murder ReferenceNo. 4 of 2014, hearad on 26th April, 2018*.Date of hearing:26th April, 2018.
Before Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan and Tariq Saleem Sheikh, JJ
Syed Zeeshan Haider for Appellant. Ch. Asghar Ali Gill, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State. Sadiq Mehmood Khurram for the Complainant.
MUHAMMAD ANWAR and another---Appellants
VERSUS
The STATE and others---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),109,34
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 46
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence--- Dying declaration--- Doubtful--- Accused were charged for committing murder of the deceased by firing due to previous enmity---Record showed that injured then deceased was taken to hospital, where Investigating Officer reached there on receiving information about the incident and after seeking permission from the Medical Officer, recorded his statement---Medical Officer certified that victim was fit whereupon he recorded his statement which was attested by the said Medical Officer and two witnesses---Occurrence took place at 06.15 a.m. and injured then deceased was brought to the hospital at 06.30 a.m. and his statement was recorded at 08.10 a.m.---Keeping in view the fact victim had suffered multiple injuries it could reasonably be presumed that he was expecting his death at that time---Said statement of victim could be regarded as dying declaration which was admissible in evidence under Art. 46 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984--- However, perusal of statement of victim showed that he gave photographic details of the incident---It was not possible for the victim to make such a narration in his given condition---Victim was surrounded by two witnesses---Record did not indicate that necessary steps were taken to keep him out of their influence at the time of making the declaration---Said facts made the dying declaration all the more dubious and it could not be relied upon---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Abdul Razik v. The State PLD 1965 SC 151; Farman Bi v. Ghulam Farid and others 1994 SCMR 1852; Mst. Zahida Bibi v. The State PLD 2006 SC 255; Farman Ahmed v. Muhammad Inayat and others 2007 SCMR 1825; Tahir Khan v. The State 2011 SCMR 646; Muhammad Banaras v. Shah Fakhar Zaman and others 1985 SCMR 505; Mst. Khurshid Begum and 2 others. v. Tariq and others 1988 SCMR 1537; Farman Bi v. Ghulam Farid and others 1994 SCMR 1852; Basharat Ali v. Muhammad Safdar…
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