NUSRAT JAN vs State Ss — 2021 YLR 2138 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

NUSRAT JAN VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Scope---Accused was charged that she with the abetment of co-accused by administering poison caused the murder of her husband/brother of complainant---Motive behind the incident was illicit relationship of the accused with the co-accused---Illicit relationship of the accused with the co-accused had been sufficiently established on the basis of the statement of son of deceased, who had stated in clear terms that the accused used to meet the co-accused for bringing the amulets (Tawizat) and the accused had also exchanged their cellular numbers---Said witness had further stated that on the day of incident the mother gave some medicine to the father as a result whereof, the vomiting started to his father, whereupon, he demanded water but the mother did not allow to give him the same on the pretext that some medicines had been given to him and due to that, the father died early in the morning---Other witness who was also son of the deceased had also corroborated the statement of his brother---Said statements had been made by the sons against the convict-mother, hence, the truthfulness of the statement of said witnesses could not be doubted---Other witnesses had also fully supported the prosecution story---Post-mortem report as well as the report of Chemical Examiner also corroborated the incident---Circumstances proved through evidence that the poison was purchased by the co-accused and was duly administered by the accused, who was in a position to administer the same as the deceased and the accused being spouses were living together in a house, thus, it could not be said that the accused was not in a position to administer the poison to her husband in order to get rid of him and to fulfil her plans of marriage with her paramour---Such offences were committed secretly by the culprits without leaving any sign on the spot---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused, however, after considering the entire evidence and circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction, the sentence awarded to the accused by the Trial Court was reduced to the sentence already undergone---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.

NUSRAT JAN vs State Ss — 2021 YLR 2138 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR