| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 3079 = 2004 SLD 3079 = 2004 PLJ 81 |
Federal Court, Pakistan
Jail Crl. Appeal No. 89/1 of 2000, Crl. Appeal No. 86/1 of 2000 and Cr. Murder Reference No. 2/1 of 2002, decided on 26.1.2004.
Presented By: CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, C. J., DR. FIDA MUHAMMAD KHAN AND SAEEB-UR-REHMAN FARRUKH, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, Advocate for Appellant (in Cr. Appeal No. 86/1-2000). Muhammad Sharif Janjua, Advocate for State.
Jail Crl. Appeal No. 89/1 of 2000, Crl. Appeal No. 86/1 of 2000 and Cr. Murder Reference No. 2/1 of 2002, decided on 26.1.2004.
Presented By: CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, C. J., DR. FIDA MUHAMMAD KHAN AND SAEEB-UR-REHMAN FARRUKH, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, Advocate for Appellant (in Cr. Appeal No. 86/1-2000). Muhammad Sharif Janjua, Advocate for State.
MUHAMMAD JAVAID and others-Appellants
VERSUS
STATE and others-Respondents
Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1898
Section: 161
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302
Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
Section: 11
(i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898) S. 161-Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, S. 11-Appeal to FSC against acquittal of co-accused~Held: There is nothing on record to show that co- accused shared common intention with accused in committing murder of deceased-According to prosecution witnesses he was stated to be present on occurrence and was also heard ultering 'lalkara' to inmates but this fact is mentioned neither in F.I.R. nor in statement by complainant Mst. Robina u/S. 161 Cr.P.C.~He was gained. double presumption of innocence and we do not find sufficient material to set aside his acquittal- Appeal dismissed. [P. 92] H, I, J, K & M (ii) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 (VII of 1979) S. 11-Abduction with intention to commit Zz'rca-Offence of-Appeal against acquittal of-Held: Commission of Zina was alleged on 25/26.5.97 whereas medical report conducted on 26.5.1997 showed that her sexual intercourse was performed two/three days prior to her examination exact date of commission" of zina, becomes doubtful and benefit of doubt naturally goes to accused especially her statement was not corroborated _ by any other piece of evidence-Appeal dismissed. [P. 91 & 92] G & M (iii) Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860) S. 302(b)-Murder-Offence of~Conviction of-Appeal against-Apprec- iation of evidence-No independent witness all PWs are interested and relevant-Ground of-Held: An occurrence taking place inside a house, surrounded by walls, inmates of house could be witnesses and they also might be relative interse-Mere relationship of a witness with deceased by itself may not be a sufficient ground to discredit his testimony particularly when he has no motive to falsely involved an innocent person as an accused or substitute real accused in a case…