KASHIF ALI alias KALU vs State Benefit of doubt in prosecution case — 2022 SCMR 1515 SUPREME-COURT

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

KASHIF ALI alias KALU VS State Benefit of doubt in prosecution case---Scope---Single circumstance creating reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of accused make him entitled to its benefits, not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right---Any doubt arising in prosecution case is to be resolved in favour of the accused. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1515 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KASHIF ALI alias KALU VS State art. 46---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Dying declaration, reliance upon---Scope---In the present case, the alleged dying declaration was recorded by the investigating officer, however the time and place where it was recorded were not disclosed which made it highly improbable to rely upon---Investigating Officer, who recorded the dying declaration, was also not been produced in court---after the occurrence, deceased was taken to hospital and police was also present there---Police had moved an application on 27-06-2004 regarding her condition and to record her statement but despite that it did not record the statement at the first instance i.e. on 24.06.2004 and then on 27.06.2004---alleged dying declaration in the present case could not be given any credence---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was acquitted of the charge. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1515 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case KASHIF ALI alias KALU VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Complainant was neither an eye-witness nor a resident of the place of occurrence---As per the prosecution story, the complainant on receiving a call that a dacoity had been committed at his mother-in-law's house reached at the place of occurrence, however, he did not disclose the name of the person from whom he had received a call---First Information Report (FIR) was registered with an inordinate delay of about 18 hours for which no plausible explanation had been given, which made the whole prosecution story doubtful especially when initially brother of the accused was nominated in the FIR but subsequently the present accused was substituted as an accused---In the statement of the complainant which was exhibited in evidence, he stated that the deceased was discharged from hospital and thereafter she was being treated privately in her house and succumbed to the injuries at home but he did not mention the date on which she succumbed to the injuries---Record was also silent as to how and by whom she was being treated privately in her residence---Weapon of offence i.e. churri was not sent to the office of Chemical Examiner, therefore, the recovery was inconsequential and the same could not be used against the accused---As far as the alleged recovery of gold ornaments on the pointation of the accused was concerned, the same were taken into possession by two police officials, however, the statement of one of the officials could not be recorded as he was given up by the prosecution at the time of trial---Besides, no independent witness of the locality was associated in the said process---In these circumstances, it would not be safe to rely upon the recovery of golden ornaments to sustain conviction of the accused---Doubts in the authenticity of the prosecution case were grave, which could not be ignored---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was acquitted of the charge. Head NotesCase Description

KASHIF ALI alias KALU vs State Benefit of doubt in prosecution case — 2022 SCMR 1515 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR