| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 303 2012 SLD 303 2012 PLD 32 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2006, decided on 15th September, 2011
MIFTAH-UD-DIN KHAN AND KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, JJ
Ghulam Muhammad Khan Sappal for Appellant.Muhammad Karim Anjum and Qudratullah Khan for the State
Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2006, decided on 15th September, 2011
MIFTAH-UD-DIN KHAN AND KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, JJ
Ghulam Muhammad Khan Sappal for Appellant.Muhammad Karim Anjum and Qudratullah Khan for the State
RABNAWAZ
VS
ABDUR REHMAN and 3 others
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302,34
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 417(2A),410
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302/34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Qatl-e-amd---Appeal against acquittal---Prosecution witnesses were not trustworthy, because they, despite being maternal cousin inter se, had denied that relationship---Prosecution story was full of contradictions based on dishonest and illogical improvements---Occurrence had been proved unseen as prosecution witnesses were untrustworthy and case had been cooked up after due consultations and deliberations---Presumption of innocence was attached to every accused but after acquittal accused was clothed with double presumption of innocence---No case was made out by appellant/complainant for reversal of impugned acquittal---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 410 & 417(2-A)---Appeal against conviction and appeal against acquittal---Distinction---Principles of appeal against acquittal, were different from the ones against conviction---Presumption of innocence of accused was double in case of acquittal---Appellate Court would not interfere unless conclusion reached by the courts below was not supported by evidence on record---Principles on question of setting aside the acquittal detailed. 2009 SCMR 946 rel. JUDGMENT KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.---The appellant has impugned the acquittal order/judgment of accused/respondents recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, D.I. Khan passed on 22-2-2006, in Sessions Case No.52 of 2005. 2. Brief facts of the instant criminal appeal, as narrated in the F.I.R. are that appellant/complainant reported to the local police that on 9-1-2002 he was busy in building wall of one Qasim when informed by Muhammad Ramzan that today at about Subh Rooti Vela Abdur Rahman, Fazal Rahman, Muhammad Ramzan and Majeed were cutting trees in their land; who were forbidden by Haq Nawaz brother of complainant from doing so, on which all the four accused duly armed with Kalashnikovs opened fires at him with intention of killing. As a result of which he was hit and died. The motive disclosed in the F.I.R. by the complainant is the dispute of stopping the accused by the deceased from cutting the…
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