| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 5138 2025 SLD 5138 = 2025 PCRLJ 1125 |
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 141 and Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015, decided on 29th November, 2018.*
Before Aamer Farooq and Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, JJ
Zia-ur-Rehman for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Sadaqat Ali Jahangir, State Counsel for the
Respondent No. 1. (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Ch. Abdul Rehman Hur Bajwa for
Respondent No. 2 (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Ch. Abdul Rehman Hur Bajwa for Petitioner (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015). Zia-ur-Rehman for
Respondent No. 1 (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015). Sadaqat Ali Jahangir, State Counsel for the
Respondent No. 2 (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015).
Criminal Appeal No. 141 and Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015, decided on 29th November, 2018.*
Before Aamer Farooq and Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, JJ
Zia-ur-Rehman for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Sadaqat Ali Jahangir, State Counsel for the
Respondent No. 1. (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Ch. Abdul Rehman Hur Bajwa for
Respondent No. 2 (in Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2015). Ch. Abdul Rehman Hur Bajwa for Petitioner (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015). Zia-ur-Rehman for
Respondent No. 1 (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015). Sadaqat Ali Jahangir, State Counsel for the
Respondent No. 2 (in Criminal Revision No. 68 of 2015).
SHAKEEL AHMED QURESHI---Appellant
VERSUS
The STATE and others---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b),392,354,411,34
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 342
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 302(b), 392, 354, 411 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty, dishonestly receiving stolen property, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Accused were charged for committing murder of the husband of complainant during robbery---Appellant was duly identified by the complainant as he was previous driver of the complainant and his services were rehired two days prior to the alleged occurrence and he was given servant quarter to live in complainant's house ---On fateful day, when the deceased, aged about 84 years, opened the kitchen door at 5.30 am, the appellant and co-accused while armed with pistol entered into the bedroom of the complainant and her husband and landed pistol blows on the head of the deceased in the presence of the complainant and when the deceased got injured, he fell down on the floor---Appellant also landed pistol blows upon the complainant and thereafter tied up both the complainant and her deceased husband with nylon ropes and put pieces of cloth in their mouth, which were taken into possession by the Investigating Officer on the day of occurrence--Complainant also stated that the appellant along with his accomplice forcefully removed 12 gold bangles and two cuffs they also took out one lac rupees from bedroom cupboard along with four prize bonds each worth of Rs. 25,000/- and one hundred British pounds and fled away---Details of injuries given by Medico-Legal Officer fully corroborated the testimony of eyewitness/complainant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellant beyond shadow of any doubt---However, due to mitigating circumstances, sentence under S.411, P.P.C was set-aside, whereas the sentence under S.392 P.P.C was enhanced to 10 years and the sentence of life imprisonment under S.302(b) P.P.C was maintained---Criminal appeal was partly allowed.(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 302(b), 392, 354, 411 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty, dishonestly…