| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 839 2003 SLD 839 2003 SCMR 219 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No-61 of 1997, decided on 9th October, 2002. DATE of hearing: 1st October, 2002. (On appeal frog- the judgment dated 25-11-1996 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No. 522 of 1993 and Murder Reference No. 203 of 1993)
JAVED LABAL, SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN AND FALAK SHER, JJ
Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao M. Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the State. Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
Criminal Appeal No-61 of 1997, decided on 9th October, 2002. DATE of hearing: 1st October, 2002. (On appeal frog- the judgment dated 25-11-1996 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No. 522 of 1993 and Murder Reference No. 203 of 1993)
JAVED LABAL, SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN AND FALAK SHER, JJ
Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao M. Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the State. Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
REHMAT ALI
VS
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 322,302(b)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1$60)--- ----S. 322---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to the complainant by Supreme Court for re-appraisement of the evidence on record. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 322 & 302(b)---Appeal against acquittal on capital charge---Appraisal of evidence---High Court while juxtaposing the prosecution and the defence versions had erred in excluding the medical evidence from consideration which had completely shattered the foundation of the defence plea of accidental firing ---F.I.R. was promptly lodged---Complainant's testimony had remained unimpeached despite searching cross-examination which was fully corroborated by his brother---Ocular evidence could not be brushed aside merely on account of the relationship of the eye-witnesses with the deceased specially when they were equilaterally related to the accused as well---Presence of eye-witnesses at the venue of occurrence was perfectly natural who had no motive to maliciously involve the accused in the murder of their daughter leaving the real culprit to go scot free---Medical evidence as to locale and range of firing had proved the prosecution case against the accused beyond the realm of doubt of a brutal murder of a young woman visibly carrying an advanced pregnancy---Impugned was consequently set aside and the accused was convicted under S. 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine---Appeal was accepted accordingly. Ghulam Sikandar and another v. Mamaraz Khan and another PLD 1985 SC 11 ref. JUDGMENT FALAK SHER, J.---Rehmat Ali appellant having reported the murder of his married daughter Mst. Kaniz Bibi aged 24/25 by his paternal cousin Muhammad Nawaz respondent culminating into his conviction and sentence under section 302(b) to death with a fine of Rs.25,000 or in default to suffer two years' R.I. by Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot, District Jhang, discarding the defence plea of accidental firing, vide judgment dated 28-6-1993, however on appeal (No.522 of 1993 and Murder Reference 203 of 1993) a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court persuaded by the respondent's version juxta-posing the same with theβ¦
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492