ABDUL AZIZ vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 2120 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.

ABDUL AZIZ VS State Ss. 302, 324, 337-F(v) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, itlaf-i-udw, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Motive proved---Accused were charged that they made firing upon the complainant party, due to which father and brother of the complainant died whereas complainant and two of his relatives were injured---Motive behind the occurrence was divorce given by one of the deceased to the sister of the accused persons---Motive played a vital role in determination of criminal liability of the perpetrators when they were claimed to have shared common intention, however, in the present case, no serious effort was made to throw light with more zeal on such part of the story---Mere production of divorce certificate and passport of deceased did not absolve the prosecution to bring on the record the relevant evidence through the witnesses---However, it was proved that accused persons came armed at the place of occurrence for doing something wrong---Accused persons did not prefer to adduce defence evidence despite their early effort to distort the facts that occurrence took place due to firing in jubilation and availability of a video film of marriage ceremony containing some facts contra to prosecution case---Yet no such video was produced during the trial nor Investigating Officer was aware of such video---Defence claimed that occurrence took place at the spur of the moment, therefore, accused persons could not be expected to have shared any common intention in commission of offence and they were liable for sentence on the basis of their individual roles if the case was proved against them---However, in the arena of common intention different parameter were in vogue which were applied, and depending upon the facts of each case, principle of vicarious liability changed its meaning to outline an appropriate sentencing regime---Such parameters had been thrashed in depth in the present case to see their proper application corresponding to claim and evidence of the parties---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case against the accused persons, however, due to mitigating circumstances, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was partly allowed with modification in sentence.

ABDUL AZIZ vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 2120 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR