Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S.302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Unexplained delay of almost seven hours and fifty minutes in lodging the FIR---Consequential--Accused was alleged to have murdered the son of complainant by firing at him--Trial Court convicted the accused under S.302(b), P.P.C and sentenced him to imprisonment for life---Held: Exact time of occurrence was not mentioned in the FIR, however, in post mortem report the time of death had been cited as 11:00 p.m. whereas the complainant lodged the FIR on the next morning at 06:50 a.m.i.e. almost seven hours and fifty minutes after the occurrence, whereas, the police station was just five kilometers from the place of occurrence---Nowhere in the entire evidence, the prosecution had explained the reason for such delay in reporting the matter to the police---Delay FIR showed dishonesty on the part of the complainant and that it was lodged with deliberation and consultation--Prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt---Consequently, appeal was allowed and the conviction and sentences of the accused were set aside and he was acquitted of the charge by extending him the benefit of doubt.Manzar Abbas and another v. The State 2025 SCMR 1024 rel.(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S.302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Unnatural conduct of alleged witnesses---Presence of alleged witnesses at the scene of occurrence doubtful---Contradictions in evidence of witnesses---Accused was alleged to have murdered the son of complainant by firing at him---Trial Court convicted the accused under S.302(b), P.P.C and sentenced him to imprisonment for life--Held: son-in-law of the complainant, who was an alleged eye-witness of the ocular account, deposed in his examination-in-chief that at about 11:00 p.m. when he was sitting in a Baithak complainant informed him about the missing of his deceased-son, whereas during cross-examination this alleged witness deposed that complainant told him by 9/10 p.m. that his son was missing--Prosecution did not furnish any plausible justification for non-production of two alleged witnesses whose house were visited by…