SHAHBAZ AHMAD vs State Benefit of doubt — 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If there was a circumstance which created reasonable doubt in the prudent mind about the guilt of the accused, then he would be entitled to its benefit not as a matter of grace or concession, but as of right. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Ss. 302, 404, 449, 109 & 34--- Qatl-i-amd, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive was not proved---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant---Motive of the occurrence mentioned by complainant in his statement before the Trial Court was dispute of money transaction but did not explain it, which was not believable---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Ss. 302, 404, 449, 109 & 34--- Qatl-i-amd, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of about thirty one hours in lodging the FIR---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant--- Medical Officer, who conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body stated before the Trial Court that dead body of the deceased was received in the dead house whereafter autopsy was conducted with the delay of about thirty one hours---Such delay was generally suggestive of a real possibility that time had been consumed by the police in procuring and planting eye-witnesses and in cooking up a story for the prosecution before preparing police papers necessary for getting a post-mortem examination of the dead body conducted---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Ss. 302, 404, 449, 109 & 34--- Qatl-i-amd, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---No justification for the presence of eye-witnesses at the place of occurrence---Chance witnesses---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant---Admittedly, both the eye-witnesses were not the residents of the house of occurrence---Rough site plan and scaled site plan did not show the houses of eye-witnesses around the place of occurrence---Both the eye-witnesses were chance witnesses but they had failed to establish their presence at the time of occurrence at the place of occurrence with their stated reasons---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Ss. 302, 404, 449, 109 & 34--- Qatl-i-amd, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of about twenty one hours in lodging the FIR---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant---First Information Report was lodged on the written application moved by his paternal uncle with the delay of about twenty one hours---Both the eye-witnesses while explaining delay in lodging of the FIR stated in their statements before the Trial Court that accused and his co-accused persons (since acquitted) while leaving the place of occurrence locked the outdoor of the house confining them in the house with the dead body---On the following day one person came there, who by unlocking the door of the house set them free---Said person in that respect was the most material witness but he had been withheld with the reason best known to the prosecution---Presumption under illustration of Art. 129 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 could fairly be drawn that had the above mentioned witness been produced, he would have been deposed against the prosecution---Explanation regarding the delay in lodging of the FIR was not believable---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SHAHBAZ AHMAD VS State Ss. 302, 404, 449, 109 & 34--- Qatl-i-amd, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of pistol, crime empties and cash on the pointation of accused---Reliance---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant---Recovery of pistol on pointing of the accused in absence of the positive report of Forensic Science Agency regarding matching of the crime empties with the weapon of offence was inconsequential in the present case---Likewise, the recovery of amount on pointing out of the accused, considering the peculiar circumstances of that case, was not believable---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court.

SHAHBAZ AHMAD vs State Benefit of doubt — 2023 PCrLJN 43 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported