Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES vs State Benefit of do

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 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Not many circumstances creating doubt in the prosecution story are required to acquit an accused---One circumstance creating doubt will be enough to extend benefit of the same to the accused. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Withholding best evidence---Effect---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Statement of complainant showed that owner of tractor engaged for harvesting peanut crop was present at the spot at the time of occurrence, but he was never cited as an eye-witness of the case---In that way, the prosecution had withheld the best available evidence, which inclined the Court to draw an inference within the meanings of Art. 129(g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 that had the said witness been produced before the Trial Court, he would not have supported the story incorporated in crime report, otherwise there was no plausible reason to let off such an important piece of evidence---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Each criminal case had its own peculiar facts and circumstances and same hardly coincide with each other on salient features. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---No justification for the presence of eye-witnesses at the spot---Chance witnesses---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Incident had taken place in an open area located at a distance of about 25-minutes of travelling from the residences of alleged eye-witnesses but they could not advance any convincing reason for their availability at the spot at the relevant time---Complainant, on the one hand stated that she along with her daughter and husband went to the place of occurrence for grazing cattle and on the other, she stated that they had gone to their fields to harvest peanut crop by engaging a tractor blade---Similarly, eye-witness also claimed to have witnessed the tragedy by chance while stating that he was grazing his cattle there---Both the alleged eye-witnesses were nothing but chance witnesses, which aspect of the case prompted not to place any reliance on them---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Medical evidence---Scope---Medical evidence might confirm the other available evidence with regard to the seat and nature of injuries, the kind of weapon used and the time of occurrence but it would not identify the accused. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account was not supported by medical evidence---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Motive for the occurrence was stated to be that the co-accused had suspicion that the deceased had illicit relation with his wife and due to that grudge, accused committed the murder---Ocular account had been furnished by complainant and an eye-witness---Statements of said witnesses revealed that though they had reiterated almost the same facts as narrated in FIR, but the mode and manner of incident narrated by them did not appeal to human prudence---Question arose as to how the deceased was able to stand on his feet after sustaining first firearm injury on his head at the hands of co-accused (P.O.) only to wait for the accused to inflict the other firearm injury on his head---Record showed that both the firearm injuries on the head of the deceased were inflicted from a short distance as according to the Medical Officer, blackening/tattooing was present on firearm entry wounds---Keeping in view the force of velocity created by the fire shots from close range, there was no chance for the deceased, in normal course of nature, to remain in standing position after sustaining first fire shot, but the alleged eye-witnesses remained stubborn in their stance that both the firearm injuries were sustained by the deceased while he was in standing position---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Better to acquit ten guilty persons than to convict a single innocent person. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Co-accused, who was assigned a specific role of inflicting blunt side of hatchet on the head of the deceased, had been acquitted of the charge by extending the benefit of doubt in his favour---Judgment of Trial Court to the extent of acquittal of co-accused had not been brought under attack by the prosecution---Accused was held guilty on the basis of same evidence which had already been disbelieved to the extent of co-accused without appreciating that no independent corroboration was available on record qua the accused so as to distinguish the case of the accused from the acquitted co-accused---Even the recovery of weapon was not connecting the accused with the crime in question, whereas motive even according to the prosecution's own showing was against co-accused(P.O.)---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of weapon of offence and crime empties---Reliance---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Pistol .30 bore was allegedly effected from the accused---Report of Forensic Science Laboratory showed that three empties collected by the Investigating Officer during spot inspection were identified as having been fired from the recovered pistol---Accused was arrested in connection with the case on 19.10.2017 and allegedly he got recovered pistol on 25.10.2017, but the Moharrar Malkhana categorically stated that two parcels one of pistol 30 bore and the other of blood stained earth were handed over to him by the Investigating Officer on 02.11.2016, which was the date of incident--- Another aspect which made the recovery of weapon as well as the positive report useless for the prosecution was that according to recovery memo, the pistol was containing identification marks on its left side as "MADE IN PAKISTAN CAL 7.63MM30A" and "VPERPAWOR", but the pistol deposited in the Forensic Science Agency, according to report, was marked as 23003-03934/16---Prosecution side had failed to clarify as to which of the two pistols 30 bore i.e. pistol 30 bore handed over by the Investigating Officer to the Moharrar Malkhana on the day of occurrence and pistol allegedly recovered from the accused had matched with three crime empties---No reliance could be placed on the recovery of pistol .30 bore as well as the positive report, in circumstances---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive was not proved---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused committed murder of the husband of complainant---Motive for the occurrence was stated to be that the co-accused had suspicion that the deceased had illicit relation with his wife and due to that grudge, accused committed the murder---Motive was not directly attributed to the accused and the same was alleged against co-accused (P.O.)---Investigating Officer candidly admitted during his cross-examination that he had not joined any person from the village to verify the motive i.e. suspicion of co-accused (P.O.) regarding illicit relation of his wife with the deceased---Prosecution had not been able to connect the accused with the murder of deceased through the asserted motive---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. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES VS State absconsion---Scope---Mere absconsion of accused was not a conclusive proof of his guilt and it is only a suspicious circumstance against the accused that he was found guilty of the offence---Suspicions after all were suspicions and the same could not be given the place of proof---Value of absconsion always depended on the facts of each case---absconsion of the accused might be consistent with his guilt or innocence, which was to be decided keeping in view overall facts of the case.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAEES vs State Benefit of doubt — 2023 PCrLJ 532 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ