| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 6456 2011 SLD 6456 2011 PCRLJ 526 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 2009, decided on 23rd December, 2010.Date of hearing : 23rd December, 2010.
Before Mian Fasih-ul-Mulk and Abdul Samad Khan, JJ
Shad Muhammad Khan for Appellant. M. Muzaffar Khan Swati for
Respondent. Ghulam Younis Khan Tanoli for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 2009, decided on 23rd December, 2010.Date of hearing : 23rd December, 2010.
Before Mian Fasih-ul-Mulk and Abdul Samad Khan, JJ
Shad Muhammad Khan for Appellant. M. Muzaffar Khan Swati for
Respondent. Ghulam Younis Khan Tanoli for the State.
SHAHZAD alias KHANAY---Appellant
VS
THE STATE and another---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),324,337-F(iii),337-Y
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii) & 337-Y---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, causing Mutalahimah---Appreciation of evidence--Sentence, reduction in---Mitigating circumstances---Complainant and one of the prosecution witnesses, who were totally disinterested and natural witnesses of the occurrence, were examined; and their statements inspired confidence---Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination, but their evidence remained unshattered---Certain infirmities and contradictions in the statements of witnesses, were not of such a nature, which would imbalance the entire prosecution evidence and create doubt favouring accused---Sufficient ocular as well as circumstantial evidence supported by medical evidence was available which reasonably connected accused with commission of offence---Trial Court had rightly convicted accused under S.302(b), P.P.C.---No motive was advanced in the F.I.R., actual cause of occurrence was not known---Something abruptly had happened before occurrence which was deliberately suppressed by the prosecution---Normal penalty for offence of murder was death, but in appropriate cases where some extenuating circumstances were available, courts had discretion to award lesser punishment of imprisonment for life---No background of any previous enmity or deep-rooted hostility existed between accused and deceased---Accused fired only one shot and did not repeat it---All such factors cumulatively, had made out a case for mitigation and accused deserved lesser penalty of life imprisonment instead of death, which would meet the ends of justice---Maintaining conviction of accused his sentence under S.302(b), P.P.C. was reduced to imprisonment for life, instead of death, while the remaining impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, was maintained. JUDGMENT MIAN FASIH-UL-MULK, JUSTICE:---.--- Shahzad appellant has filed Criminal Appeal No.88 of 2009 against the judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Mansehra dated 13-8-2009, whereby he was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced to death with payment of Rs.3,00,000 as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C.…
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