Citation Name: 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER vs State Benefit of dou

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 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---In case of doubt, the benefit thereof must accrue in favour of the accused as matter of right and not of grace. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER VS State Ss. 302 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Dishonest improvement made by complainant--- Scope--- Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by complainant and two other eye-witnesses---Complainant happened to be a real brother of deceased and FIR was lodged on his application---Stance of the complainant described in his application was totally different to the stance taken by him while appearing before the Trial Court---Complainant while appearing as a witness did not state that his version was not correctly recorded in the application and the complainant also did not offer any explanation regarding improvements made by him---Complainant got written in the complaint that he along with deceased was coming on metalled road, whereas, while appearing before the Trial Court he made dishonest improvement by stating that he alone was coming from the house of his brother---Trial Court had also noticed that complainant made improvements to the effect that in the meantime when he reached near the shop of the accused persons his brother/deceased and eye-witness came there on motorbike---Complainant mentioned in that complaint that fire of co-accused (since acquitted) hit on the right ear of his brother who fell down after moving some distance, whereas, while appearing in the witness box he stated that fire of co-accused (since acquitted) landed on right temporal, eye-witness tried to get escape on motorcycle but at some distance on Paka Morr deceased fell down from the motorcycle---Notable, that while appearing as court witness, the complainant introduced totally a new fact that the deceased was not coming along with him from the house of his brother and thereafter deceased reached at the place of occurrence on motorbike with one eye-witness---Said fact made the case of prosecution as highly doubt-full which was very much fatal to the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution failed to establish the culpability of the accused on the basis of its evidence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER VS State Ss. 302 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Defence plea---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Accused took the plea that he acted in self defence in order to save his own life from the hands of deceased as evident from the statement of accused---Accused claimed innocence and pleaded acquittal on account of false implication---If the prosecution evidence was disbelieved by the court in its entirety, the defence version was to be accepted or rejected as a whole and it was legally not possible to accept the inculpatory part of the defence plea and reject its exculpatory part---Defence plea could be accepted or rejected in toto and the practice of picking and choosing some sentences favouring the prosecution in isolation of those favouring the accused was strictly prohibited by the law---Circumstances established that the prosecution miserably failed to discharge its duty---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER VS State Ss. 302 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of complainant at the place of occurrence was doubtful---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Record showed that the witness had stated in his examination-in-chief that he made a call to Rescue 15 and soon after that police reached the place of occurrence and collected blood stained earth---If it was so and the police reached at the place of occurrence after receiving the call of a witness then complainant who claimed to be an eye-witness of the occurrence was also present at the place of occurrence then he should have moved application straightaway for registration of FIR at the spot but as per prosecution's own case the complainant submitted complaint to Police Official/ASI at a Ada at 05.00 p.m., whereas,occurrence took place on 04.30 p.m. and according to the statement of witness he reported the matter to Rescue 15 soon after the occurrence and police reached there---Moreso, one of the important eye-witnesses was not produced before the Trial Court giving rise to an adverse inference regarding his presence at the scene of the crime---Said analysis made the presence of the eye-witnesses at the crime scene doubtful, as concluded by the Trial Court---Consequently, the medical evidence or the recovery of the firearm from the accused lent little support or corroboration to the case of the prosecution---Circumstances established that the prosecution failed to establish the culpability of the accused on the basis of its evidence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case GHULAM DASTGEER vs State Benefit of doubt — 2023 YLR 793 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR