Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

1. Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt---According to the statements of alleged eye-witnesses recorded at the trial, they both did not inform the police about the occurrence---None of the prosecution witness had disclosed at the trial as to who had informed the police about the occurrence or how the police reached at the place of occurrence when neither any relative of deceased nor any inhabitant of the area had informed the police about the occurrence---Time of taking the dead body to the hospital as claimed by a prosecution witness was contradicted by the Medical Officer---Site map mentioned only one door of the room of deceased but alleged eye-witnesses had stated that the room of deceased had two doors---Statements of alleged eye-witnesses and other prosecution witnesses contained material contradictions and discrepancies which shook veracity of their testimony---Alleged eye-witnesses failed to furnish any convincing reason for stay of two such witnesses in a room adjacent to that of the deceased on the night of the occurrence---Alleged eye-witnesses claimed that they saw the deceased being strangled to death but they put no resistance against the accused nor took any step to save the life of deceased---Plea of alleged eye-witnesses that they did not put up resistance as the accused persons threatened them with firearms lacked corroboration as during investigation no firearms were recovered from the accused and acquitted accused---Unnatural conduct of alleged eye-witnesses revealed that they were not present in the house of deceased at the time of occurrence--Dishonest improvements made by alleged eye-witnesses in their statements at the trial had rendered their testimony unworthy of reliance---Occurrence of the death of deceased by strangulation was unwitnessed; the conduct of investigating officer was not fair and impartial; fabrication had been made during investigation by an alleged eye-witness with the connivance of the investigating officer to falsely implicate the accused persons by planting himself and others as eye-witnesses of the occurrence---Prosecution had failed to prove the charge against both the accused beyond reasonable doubt---Petitions were converted into appeals and allowed, and both the accused persons were acquitted of the charge under sections 302(b) & 34, P.P.C.

1. Criminal trial---

----Witness, statement of---Dishonest improvements---Dishonest improve-ments made by a witness in his statement to strengthen the prosecution case casts serious doubt about veracity of his statement and makes the same untrustworthy and unreliable.