Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1009 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. HALEEMA vs State Ss

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

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1009 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. HALEEMA VS State Ss. 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 337-L, 336, 336-B & 34---Shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, hurt, Itlaf-i-salahiyyat-i-udw, hurt by corrosive substance (acid), common intention---appreciation of evidence---Recovery of syringe and canister from the place of occurrence---accused sprayed acid on the face of complainant with a syringe, while other accused had thrown on her acid present in a jerry can, as a result of which she had received severe burns on her face and rest of her body---Corroboratory pieces of evidence i.e. recovery of syringe as well as canister from the place of occurrence gave added vigor to the case of prosecution---Recovery of pipe of gas cylinder and partly burnt clothes of the complainant as well as of both the accused persons also supported case of the prosecution and might well be considered as effective corroboratory pieces of evidence---Besides, prosecution had also examined a Constable in support of the recoveries---Statements of both the witnesses had remained consistent and no material contradiction could be found therein---Circumstances established that prosecution had been able to prove case against both the accused persons beyond a shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1009 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. HALEEMA VS State Ss. 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 337-L, 336, 336-B & 34---Shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah, hurt, Itlaf-i-salahiyyat-i-udw, hurt by corrosive substance (acid), common intention---appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---accused sprayed acid on the face of complainant with a syringe, while other accused had thrown on her acid present in a jerry can, as a result of which she had received severe burns on her face and rest of her body---Complainant was sole eye-witness of the occurrence---In her examination-in-chief she had stated that after opening fast they had been eating water melon on the day of occurrence when accused went to her house situated adjacent to house of the complainant and her step-daughter, co-accused came there and sprayed acid on her face through a syringe while other accused also came thereafter and threw further acid on her head, as a result of which her face, nose, head and other parts of her body got burnt---Neighbours as well as her son were stated to have carried the complainant to hospital where she had lodged report of the occurrence against the accused persons---Said witness was cross-examined by defence side but she had remained firm, consistent and nothing beneficial to the case of the accused persons could be brought out from her mouth during the course of her cross-examination---Statement of the Medical Officer fully corroborated version of the complainant taken in her first report as well as in her examination-in-chief---Both the statements of complainant as well as Medical Officer were in complete harmony with each other---Statement of the Medical Officer regarding her findings of injuries on the hands and other parts of body of accused had further fortified her presence and the factum of participation in the occurrence---Circumstances established that prosecution had been able to prove case against both the accused persons beyond a shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was dismissed.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1009 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. HALEEMA vs State Ss — 2023 MLD 1009 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD