MUHAMMAD RIAZ vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 1005 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MUHAMMAD RIAZ VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Un-natural witnesses---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the deceased by firing---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by two eye-witnesses, including complainant---Complainant was the resident of a chak---Distance between the residence of complainant and place of occurrence was one kilometre and similar was the position with eye-witness---No plausible explanation had come on record by which they could justify their presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time---Presence of complainant and eyewitness was further doubted for the reason that though according to the complainant the occurrence took place at 9.00 a.m. and he had not deposed that who told him about the earlier altercation and even their presence at the crime scene according to site plan was at distance from where one could not view the hitting of fire with exactitude---After the occurrence, complainant shifted victim to hospital situated at a distance of 14/15 kilometres from the place of occurrence where he succumbed---According to Medical Officer who had conducted the autopsy, the dead body was received in the mortuary on the same day at 5.00 p.m.---Complete documents were received from the police at 6.30 p.m. and the post-mortem was conducted at 6.40 p.m.---Had the complainant and eyewitness been present at the time and place of occurrence such unexplained and protracted delay would never have occurred and the police would not have taken so long to prepare and produce the relevant documents to the doctor for autopsy---Said circumstances were found sufficient to disbelieve the statements of witnesses---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---If prosecution had failed and the statement of the accused under S. 342, Cr.P.C. was accepted in entirety, the court was then to give due effect to the statement of the accused, under the law, whether in favour of or against the accused---Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD RIAZ vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 1005 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ