ASLAM vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

ASLAM VS State Ss. 302(b), 364 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 345---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Compounding of offence--- Scope--- Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of the complainant after kidnapping him---Admittedly, the parties had entered into compromise and the legal heirs of the deceased had forgiven the accused in the name of Almighty Allah and had waived their right of Qisas and Diyat---When the offence under S. 302, P.P.C., being the main offence, had come to an end consequent upon the compromise having been entered into by the parties, the question arose as to whether the offence under S. 364, P.P.C., allegedly committed by the accused in continuation of offence under S. 302, P.P.C., would be merged---Assistant Prosecutor General appearing for the State had conceded to such proposal---Both the parties had amicably settled all their differences and disputes and had agreed to pass rest of their lives in peace, tranquillity and harmony---Non-compoundability of a particular offence under any section of the enactment should not be read in isolation but it should be read in the background of each criminal case and beneficial interpretation should be given to it---In the present case, when both the parties had earnestly decided to live in peace and tranquillity by ignoring and settling all their past differences, then for the sake of their welfare in particular and betterment of socioeconomic conditions of the society as a whole, it would be prime need of the time to accept the compromise and consequently acquit the accused from the charges---Application filed under S. 345(2), Cr.P.C., was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASLAM VS State Ss. 302(b), 364 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of two days in lodging FIR---Effect---Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of the complainant after kidnapping him---Admittedly, there was a delay of two days in lodging the FIR---No plausible explanation had come forward from the prosecution side for such an inordinate delay---Possibility of deliberation and false implication of the accused could not be overruled---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Compromise between the parties was also effected---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASLAM VS State Ss. 302(b), 364 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Unnatural conduct of eye-witnesses--- Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of the complainant after kidnapping him---Father of alleged eye-witness was being mercilessly beaten and then allegedly kidnapped along with coaster, instead of approaching the police immediately, eye-witness and his brother, who also claimed to have seen the alleged incident, escaped away from the place of incident and went by foot to a hotel situated at a distance of about 4/5 kilometres from place of incident and remained there for about one hour and thirty minutes---Said witness also admitted that he went to other place wherefrom he took his sister---Said witness also admitted that the distance in between two places would be about 150 kilometres---No explanation had come forward from the prosecution side as to why instead of approaching police station straight away, the alleged two eye-witnesses, who were also real sons of the deceased, spent a long time of one hour and thirty minutes at a hotel and travelled a long distance of about 150 Kilometres---Said admission reflected that either the complainant/eye-witness was not available at the time of alleged incident or the incident had not taken place in the manner as reported---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Compromise between the parties was also effected---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASLAM VS State Ss. 302(b), 364 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Infirmities and discrepancies in the prosecution case---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of the complainant after kidnapping him---Record showed that there were serious infirmities and discrepancies in the prosecution case---Delay of 28 days in exhumation proceedings, as admitted by Judicial Magistrate---In the final post-mortem report it was opined that cause of death of deceased was undetermined---No crime weapon, allegedly used by the accused, had been recovered from any of the accused---Although it had been alleged that the coaster allegedly driven by the deceased was secured from lands of accused, however, no material had been placed on record to establish that the land/place of recovery belonged to the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Compromise between the parties was also effected---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASLAM VS State Ss. 302(b), 364 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting in order to murder, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused were charged for committing murder of the father of the complainant after kidnapping him---Evidence of alleged eye-witness, showed that it was apparent that he had admitted in clear terms that the accused persons took his father to a hospital and after treatment left the dead body of his father there---If contents of S.364, P.P.C., were put in juxtaposition to the said admission of the alleged eye-witness, it might safely be observed that had the accused any intention to kidnap or abduct complainant's father in order to commit his murder then what was the fun in taking him to the hospital for treatment as admitted by the alleged eye-witness---Ingredients of S.364, P.P.C., were totally lacking in the case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Compromise between the parties was also effected, hence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

ASLAM vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1188 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR