| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5584 2024 SLD 5584 2024 SCMR 1811 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Shariat Appeal No. 2 of 2018, decided on 8th August, 2024. (Against the judgment dated 24.01.2012 of the Federal Shariat Court, Islamabad passed in Criminal Appeal No. 164-L of 2004 and Crl. Murder Reference No. 8-L of 2005).
Present: Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Chairman, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, Dr. Muhammad Khalid Masud and Dr. Qibla Ayaz, Members
Humayoun Rashid Ch., Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ahmed Raza Gillani, Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab for the State. Zulfiqar Ahmed Bhutta, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 8th August, 2024
Criminal Shariat Appeal No. 2 of 2018, decided on 8th August, 2024. (Against the judgment dated 24.01.2012 of the Federal Shariat Court, Islamabad passed in Criminal Appeal No. 164-L of 2004 and Crl. Murder Reference No. 8-L of 2005).
Present: Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Chairman, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, Dr. Muhammad Khalid Masud and Dr. Qibla Ayaz, Members
Humayoun Rashid Ch., Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ahmed Raza Gillani, Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab for the State. Zulfiqar Ahmed Bhutta, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 8th August, 2024
IMRAN alias MANI---Appellant
VERSUS
The STATE---Respondent
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b) & 34
Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
Section: 10(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 302(b) & 34---Offence of Zina (Enforcement Of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10(2)---Qatl-i-amd, common intention, zina---Material eye-witnesses not testifying---Motive not proved---Unnatural conduct of eye-witnesses in not saving the deceased---Incidentally, all the three stated eye-witnesses were related and were also related to the deceased, however, one of them did not testify as he was given up---Another material witness also did not testify as he too was given up for no reason---Site plan showed the room in which the stated zina was being committed, which was at one end of the house and the room in which the deceased were being killed was at the very opposite end---These two rooms were separated by a courtyard and another room---Placement of the rooms was such that the deceased would not be able to see into the room where the alleged zina was being committed even if the doors of both these rooms were left open---Therefore, the stated motive to kill the deceased, that is, their witnessing the appellant (accused) and co-accused committing zina, did not stand to reason, and, thus, there was no reason to silence them---It was also not the prosecution's case that the deceased were alerted and had come to investigate nor that they were killed at a place other than in their own room---It was also most unlikely, if not wholly unbelievable, that while committing zina the appellant would suddenly be motivated to proceed to kill two elderly persons who lay sleeping---And, assuming that the appellant had been found committing zina by the three eye-witnesses it was but reasonable to presume that the appellant would get dressed and make good their escape or would try to do so--Entire case of the prosecution rested on the testimony of two witnesses, one of whom testified that after he gained entry into the house of the deceased persons, one of them was alive for about fifteen to twenty minutes and the other for about ten to fifteen minutes, however, he did absolutely nothing to save their lives; no first aid was rendered, no attempt was made to shift them to a hospital or send for a doctor or any local medical…
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