Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b), 201, 114, 34

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 103

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 40

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 302(b), 201, 114 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, intentionally causing evidence of an offence to disappear or giving false information to screen an offender, abettor present when offence committed, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---No justification for the presence of witnesses at the time and place of occurrence---Chance witnesses, evidence of---Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by inflicting toka blows---Ocular account of the incident was narrated by the witness/brother-in-law of the deceased---Said witness and complainant, since dead, were admittedly not the residents of the place of occurrence---According to the eye-witness, both he and complainant had their residences at a distance from the place of occurrence---Said witness also admitted that neither he had any residence nor any business set up near the place of occurrence---In this manner, the eye-witness could be validly termed as a "chance witness" and therefore was under a bounden duty to provide a convincing reason for his presence at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence, and was also under a duty to prove his presence by producing some physical proof of the same---Said witness failed miserably to provide any consistent evidence as to the reason for his arrival at the place of occurrence and his presence at the place of occurrence when the same was taking place---According to the said witness, the reason for their arrival at the place of occurrence was that after offering prayers at the mosque, the deceased started for the house of A to impart teaching of the Holy Quran to his children, whereas the eye-witness and complainant decided to follow the deceased on their own motorcycle and it was while following the deceased that they came to the place of the occurrence and then witnessed the same---Eye-witness admitted that he had no reason at all to follow the deceased to the house of A ---Candid admission of the eye-witness that he had no reason to follow the deceased denuded the falsity of his claim that he had witnessed the occurrence---Then eye-witness also claimed that after offering…