Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b), 324, 506(2), 34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 302(b), 324, 506(2) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, criminal intimidation, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the prosecution case---Accused were charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant---In the FIR, the complainant alleged that accused MH , armed with a hatchet, inflicted a blow with the right side of the hatchet on the head of the deceased, while accused MU also caused a hatchet blow to the right side of the head of the said deceased---Specific role attributed to the present appellants was that accused A struck the complainant on his forehead with a lathi, whereas appellant J inflicted lathi blows upon the back of deceased---Both the complainant and the eye-witness, during their examination-in-chief, supported the version narrated in the FIR and assigned the role of main assailant to MH ---However, when confronted during trial with the video clips produced as evidence, the prosecution witnesses made contradictory statements---Video recordings exhibited in Court clearly depicted that MH was empty-handed and did not attack any person---Video Clips No.12 and No.13 demonstrated that MH was standing empty-handed among the crowd and did not cause any injury to the deceased or the witnesses---Similarly, Video Clip No.17 showedthat MH was attempting to pacify the people rather than participating in the assault, while Video Clip No.18 again depicted him standing idle and unarmed, whereas a large number of other individuals were engaged in fighting---Forensic Report of digital evidence confirmed that the said video clips were genuine and un-tampered---Investigating Officer deposed that the video of the incident had gone viral on social media, whereupon he downloaded the relevant clips onto a USB device---With the permission of the SSP, he forwarded the said USB to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination and subsequently received the report, which was deposited and exhibited, wherein the result confirmed that "no editing features were observed in the visual contents of the eight (08) videos ---Testimonies of the complainant and the…