Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 693 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JUMA KHAN vs ZARIF 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 PCrLJ 693 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JUMA KHAN VS ZARIF Ss. 302, 311, 353, 109 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.265-k---Qatl-i-amd, tazir after waiver or compounding of right of qisas in qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, abetment, common intention---Power of court to acquit accused at any stage---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Benefit of doubt---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing at the behest of co-accused persons---Motive as set out in the crime report was that sister of accused had come after his deceased son to contract marriage with deceased---Record showed that in the crime report lodged at the instance of complainant, it was alleged by him that murder of his son was committed by the accused at the behest of his co-accused persons---On the face of the record, it was found that the prosecution had not placed on record any evidence to prove or show that the accused/respondent, who was not present on the crime scene, aided, abetted or facilitated the principal accused in his act of committing the crime, except, the oral allegation of the complainant party, however, that allegation was not based on legal evidence, but, was based upon presumption---Prosecution was duty bound to bring on record some tangible material to connect the accused/respondent reasonably with the offence of abetment---Law did not allow to presume anything in favour of the prosecution in the absence of any legal and conclusive evidence in support of the charge levelled against him---Abetment could be committed only when there was positive evidence of either instigation or conspiracy or intentional aid---If none of those three elements were available, then abetment did not stand proven---In the present case, mere bald allegation was not sufficient evidence to prove the fact that the accused/respondent either abeted or conspired or intentionally aided in the crime---Hence, the elements of abetment or instigation as contemplated in S. 109, P.P.C., was lacking---Even otherwise, the principal accused who was charged for committing murder of the son of the complainant had already been acquitted on the basis of compromise and nothing would be achieved, if accused/respondent was put to a full dressed trial---Circumstances established that no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect was found in the impugned judgment, calling for interference---Appeal against acquittal being bereft of merits was dismissed in limine. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 693 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JUMA KHAN VS ZARIF S. 265-K---Power of court to acquit accused at any stage---Scope---Court had got ample power to acquit the accused even if witnesses were not examined---Provisions of S. 265-K, Cr.P.C., were meant to prevent the rigorous of a protracted trial, if it was apparent from the record that there was no probability of the accused being convicted of the offence and further proceedings if allowed to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 693 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case JUMA KHAN vs ZARIF Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 693 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ