Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 826 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR-UR-REHMAN vs State S

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 826 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR-UR-REHMAN VS State S. 302(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd--- Appreciation of evidence---Specific plea of self defence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive was stated to be entrance of deceased at the house of accused for search of his pigeons---Accused had taken specific plea of self defence and even otherwise if accused had not taken plea of self defence in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C., but if the circumstances of the case and the evidence so produced reflected that the accused acted in self-defence the benefit could be extended to him---Appeal was partially allowed. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 826 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR-UR-REHMAN VS State S. 302(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Plea taken by the accused in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Motive was stated to be entrance of deceased at the house of accused for search of his pigeons---Accused had taken specific plea in his statements under S. 342, Cr.P.C., that in his self defence he made firing upon the deceased---Though the accused acted in his defence but had exceeded what was required for his defence---Accused should have made aerial shot instead of directly firing upon the deceased---No doubt, the accused had not repeated and only one fire shot had been made which hit the deceased on his right thigh---Complainant as well as the eye-witness during course of cross-examination admitted to be correct that there was no previous enmity between them meaning thereby that if the deceased had not entered in the house of accused no offence would have been taken place---Record depicted that deceased had himself committed illegal trespass in the house of accused---Accused was living alone with his two daughters and the illegal trespass of the deceased annoyed the accused and thus resulted in the present occurrence---Moreover, the fire was made at the non-vital part of the deceased and after making firing from shotgun the accused had got three more live cartridges but he did not make any fire on the vital part of the deceased though the deceased was at the mercy of the accused for sufficient time---Said facts led to the conclusion that the accused had exercised his right of self defence, therefore, the sentence of fourteen years was excessive and sentence of ten years would meet ends of justice in the circumstances of the case---Appeal was partially allowed by reducing the sentence.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 826 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR-UR-REHMAN vs State S — 2023 PCrLJ 826 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ