Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 1441 2012 SLD 1441 2012 SCMR 428
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.499 of 2009, decision dated: 26-12-2011 (On appeal from the judgment dated 9-6-2009 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench passed in Criminal Appeal No.477-T of 2006)
TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, MIAN SAQIB NISAR AND EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, 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

ZEESHAN @ SHANI

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)-------S. 7(a) & (b)---Terrorism---Death due to terrorist act---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Identification of accused---Delay in F.I.R.---Investigation of police encounter---Police claimed that accused opened fire on police party which resulted into death of one constable---Accused was convicted and sentenced to death by Trial Court but High Court converted the sentence into imprisonment for life---Plea raised by accused was that it was night time occurrence and identity of assailant was not proved on record---Validity---Allegation that accused was already known to complainant and prosecution witnesses remained unproved and unsubstantiated, as accused had neither criminal background nor involvement of accused was proved on the record---Question as to how could the complainant and prosecution witnesses identify the accused, was unanswered---Delay of more than one hour in lodging report had also given rise to the inference that occurrence did not take place in the manner projected by prosecution and time was consumed in making effort to give a coherent attire to prosecution case, which hardly proved successful---Such delay was all the more fatal when police station, besides being connected with the scene of occurrence through a metalled road, was at a distance of 11 kilometers from the latter---Supreme Court observed that standard of proof should have been far higher as compared to any other criminal case, when according to prosecution, it was a case of police encounter and it was desirable and even imperative that such case should have been investigated by some other agency, as police in such case, could not have been investigators of their own cause---Such investigation which was woefully lacking independent character could not be made basis for conviction in a charge involving capital sentence, that too when it was riddled with many lacunas and loopholes, quite apart from the after-thoughts and improvements---To maintain conviction and sentence of accused in such circumstances would not be in accord with safe administration of justice---Supreme Court extended benefit of doubt to accused and acquitted…
🔒
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