REHMAT ALI vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 611 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT

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

REHMAT ALI VS State Ss. 302, 109 & 34---Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention, haraabah---appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in--- Ocular account---Scope---accused were charged for snatching mobile phones, gold ornaments and cash from the house of the complainant, on resistance, one of the accused fired with pistol, which hit the brother of complainant who died---Ocular account of the prosecution case hinged upon deposition of four prosecution witnesses---Complainant, real brother of deceased while corroborating the contents of the FIR stated the whole story of the case---Evidence of complainant, in lengthy protracted cross-examination, had not been shaken by the defence---Eye-witness had fully supported the complainant---Said witness was also subjected to lengthy cross-examination but no specific or notable contradiction had brought by the defence in their favour---Third eye-witness of the prosecution while deposing similar facts of the occurrence identified the accused persons present in court to be the same who committed house trespass in their dwelling and committed qatl of deceased and looted the property from their house---Said witness was also cross-examined at length, spreading on eight pages but no specific contradiction had brought on record by the defence---Record showed that it had become amply clear that the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention trespassed forcibly in the house of deceased and in furtherance of their intention, one of the accused fired pistol shot at brother of complainant, who died---Presence of remaining three accused in the dwelling of complainant had also been established from the evidence and identification parade was held before the Civil Judge, hence all accused persons were liable for the offence committed by them jointly---Presence of the accused at the time of occurrence with firearm weapon had not been specifically denied and they were identified by the eye-witnesses, therefore, all accused were responsible for the act committed by any of them---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt, however, the Trial Court while awarding sentence under S. 544(a), Cr.P.C., in case of default of payment of compensation, had exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding two years' imprisonment, whereas the maximum period provided under S.544-a(2), Cr.P.C., was six months---Said period was modified with sentence of six months in case of non-realization of compensation amount---appeal against conviction was dismissed with said modification.

REHMAT ALI vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 611 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR