TAJ MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2022 PCrLJ 126 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.

TAJ MUHAMMAD VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Dying declaration---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Statement of deceased under S. 161, Cr.P.C., which had been claimed as dying declaration---One of the considerations to appreciate the dying declaration was that, it must be free from any outside promptness that means that at the relevant time no one had to be there to influence the deceased---Not only that, but also no one met him before his statement---Investigating Officer admitted in cross-examination that at the time of recording statement of injured, complainant and two witnesses were also present there---Said fact alone was enough to discard the evidence of dying declaration---Investigating Officer recorded the statement after seeking declaration from the woman Medical Officer, which meant that she was present in hospital at the relevant time---Investigating Officer was duty bound to record the statement in the presence of woman Medical Officer and then to obtain her signature in token of its correctness with a certificate also that injured remained conscious throughout during his statement---Even otherwise, the dying declaration was factually incorrect as injured had alleged sole fire by accused whereas through medical evidence it had been established that he had received two fire shots and same was also maintained by two eye-witnesses---In the present case, it had been established that one female was involved in hatching the conspiracy whereas in dying declaration injured had stated that they were two different personalities---Said deliberations made a definite result that the alleged dying declaration had not been proved by the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt--- Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

TAJ MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2022 PCrLJ 126 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ