Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b), 109 , 34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention--Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in prosecution evidence---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the maternal uncle of complainant by firing---Occurrence had taken place on 16.07.2017 at 12.45 pm and complainant reported the incident to the police through an oral statement at 03.10 pm in emergency ward of the hospital, which sent the same to the police station through a Constable for formal registration of FIR---First Information Report was chalked out at 03.25 pm on 16.07.2017--Case of prosecution was that the injured was shifted to hospital by the complainant, his brother and the people of the locality---On perusal of MedicoLegal Certificate, it was revealed that injured was accompanied by his brother-inlaw---From the testimony of the complainant, it was revealed that before recording statement of the witness, SI examined the body of the deceased, examined the injuries received by the deceased and then recorded the statement of the complainant---Admitted fact that before recording the statement of the complainant, the partial investigation was conducted by SI---Medical Officer deposed that on 16.09.2017, patient was brought by his brother-in-law to emergency department at about 01.12 pm and she conducted Medico-Legal Certificate at about 01.15 pm---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----Ss. 302(b), 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention--Appreciation of evidence---Delay of 21 hours in conducting the postmortem examination of the dead body of deceased---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the maternal uncle of complainant by firing---Duration between the death of the deceased and the postmortem examination contradicted the prosecution's case---Per the prosecution's version, the occurrence occurred at 12:45 p.m. on 16.07.2017---As per the prosecution's case, deceased took his last breath at 2:45 p.m. on 16.09.2017 and the matter was reported to police at 03.00 p.m. on 16.07.2017---Dead body was shifted to the hospital for a postmortem examination and postmortem examination was conducted at 11:45 a.m. on 17.09.2017, i.e., 21 hours after the occurrence--Whereas the Medical Officer who had conducted the postmortem examination opined that the duration between death and postmortem examination was 21 hours, which fact vitiated the prosecution case set forth by the ocular account--Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Rafique alias Feeqa v. The State 2019 SCMR 1068 and Sufyan Nawaz and another v. The State and others 2020 SCMR 192 rel.