IRFAN SALEEM vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1782 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.

IRFAN SALEEM VS State Ss. 302(b) & 449---Qatl-i-amd, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Medical evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---According to the opinion of Medical Officer, duration between injuries and death was immediate, whereas between death and post mortem it was 6-7 hours---Examination of dead body made it clear that wounds were caused by 12 bore gun as those were pellet injuries---Pellets and cover of pellets were also removed from the dead body---Medical evidence was strong confirmatory evidence in the case and stood with ocular account---Circumstances established that accused had been rightly convicted by the Trial Court---Death penalty was converted into imprisonment for life as the same was extreme penalty, in circumstances---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Investigation---Defective investigation---Scope---Defective investigation conducted by a Police Officer could not stand in the way of complainant who was seeking justice from the court. Ss. 302(b) & 449---Qatl-i-amd, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Motive was not proved---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Motive in the case was that accused had a suspicion that deceased was having illicit relations with his wife and for that reason accused had divorced her---No proof of divorce by accused to his wife had been produced during trial and similarly Investigating Officer never joined that lady in the investigation for confirmation of fact of divorce---Motive had not been proved, in circumstances---Circumstances established that accused had been rightly convicted by the Trial Court---However, it was found that it was not a case of extreme penalty of death on the reason that motive in the case had not been proved by the prosecution---Death penalty was converted into imprisonment for life, in circumstances---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence. Ss. 302(b) & 449---Qatl-i-amd, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Night time occurrence---Source of light---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Allegedly, no electric bulb was taken into possession or shown in the rough and scaled site plans--- Question arose for the identification of accused---Complainant categorically stated that electric bulb was there and it was on---Such fact was not a new stance of complainant because even in FIR it was stated that there was an electric bulb in the courtyard, however, record showed that neither that bulb was shown in the site plan nor it was taken into possession---Investigating Officer stated in his cross-examination that he reached at the spot at 6.45 a.m. and there was an electric bulb installed on the southern wall of residential room shown on the middle of the site plan---Light of the bulb was spreadable in whole courtyard---Light of bulb was sufficient for identification of a person in that light---Said bulb was switched on and he had seen the same and had not taken into possession the said bulb because he considered no need to take the same into possession---When defence availed right of cross-examination, no attempt was made to confront Investigating Officer with regard to his answers which he made on the questions by prosecution, thus, it was established that there was an electric bulb and that was on---Circumstances established that accused had been rightly convicted by the Trial Court---Death penalty was converted into imprisonment for life as the same was extreme penalty, in circumstances---Appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence.

IRFAN SALEEM vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1782 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR