Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN vs State Ss

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 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN VS State Ss. 364-a, 368 & 34---Kidnapping, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement kidnapped or abducted person, common intention---appreciation of evidence---Prosecution witnesses were in line with each other---Scope---accused was charged for kidnapping the minor daughter of the complainant---Record showed that all the witnesses recorded their statements in line with each other and fully supported the case of prosecution---Identification of accused in the Trial Court by the abductee, during investigation before Investigating Officer and Judicial Magistrate as well as the identification of accused during Court statement had strengthened the case of prosecution---Statements of witnesses were tested through lengthy cross-examination, but all the witnesses remained firm in their deposition and nothing beneficial had come on record in favour of defence---Defence had made an unsuccessful attempt to discredit the case of prosecution merely on the basis of minor discrepancies, but those were not enough to discredit the entire case of prosecution---Disclosure of accused followed by the recovery of minor from the house of other accused established their malice intention---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against the accused through direct and circumstantial evidence---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN VS State Ss. 364-a, 368 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 22---Kidnapping, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement kidnapped or abducted person, common intention---appreciation of evidence--- Test identification parade---Scope---accused were charged for kidnapping the minor daughter of the complainant---Moreover, it had also been observed that soon after her recovery, the victim was produced before Judicial Magistrate, who recorded her statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C., wherein she narrated the story with regard to her abduction---Judicial Magistrate conducted the identification parade of the accused---Statement of Judicial Magistrate and the identification memo. confirmed that the victim soon after her recovery identified the accused during the course of identification parade---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against the accused through direct and circumstantial evidence---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN VS State Ss. 364-a, 368 & 34---Kidnapping, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement kidnapped or abducted person, common intention---appreciation of evidence---abductee was recovered on the disclosure of the accused---Scope---accused were charged for kidnapping the minor daughter of the complainant---Comparative study of abductee, Investigating Officer and Judicial Magistrate confirmed that the accused had abducted the minor---Case of prosecution had further been strengthened from the disclosure of the accused which was followed by the recovery of abductee from the house of other accused---Witness stated that the arrested accused during investigation disclosed before the Investigating Officer that he abducted the abductee from and after consultation with other accused kept the minor in his house, thus the disclosure of accused was reduced into writing and pursuant to such disclosure the accused was taken to the house of other accused from where the abductee was recovered---Record showed that prior to the incident, the accused remained involved in the abduction of children---accused further disclosed that due to presence of other family members of other accused in the house, he could not commit zina with the child---accused also pointed out the place from where the minor was abducted---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against the accused through direct and circumstantial evidence---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN VS State Ss. 364-a, 368 & 34---Kidnapping, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement kidnapped or abducted person, common intention---appreciation of evidence---accused were charged for kidnapping the minor daughter of the complainant---Record showed that the complainant of the case appeared as witness, who mostly reiterated the contents of his fard-e-bayan---Likewise, the statement of other witness was on the same footing to that of complainant as that witness arrived at the house of complainant, wherein complainant informed him about the occurrence---Most important and the star witness of the occurrence was abductee, who was the victim of the occurrence---Since, abductee was minor aged about 7-years, thus in order to ascertain her mental condition and conscious, certain questions were put upon her, which were replied correctly by that witness and thereafter her statement was recorded---Victim in her statement by pointing her fingers upon the accused stated that the said person took her on his cycle and he was not a good person---Said victim further added that the accused had warned her that in case she disclosed her name or address to someone, she would be murdered---Whereafter, accused kept the victim in a place, from where she was recovered by the police---Minor also added that the accused also slapped her---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against the accused through direct and circumstantial evidence---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN VS State Ss. 364-a, 368 & 34---Kidnapping, wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement kidnapped or abducted person, common intention---appreciation of evidence---Minor witness---Scope---accused were charged for kidnapping the minor daughter of the complainant---admittedly, victim was a minor, but at the time of her examination in chief the Court asked several questions from her and found her mentally mature and fit to answer the questions correctly---Even during cross-examination victim replied the questions correctly, which established the soundness of her mind and her statement could not be thrown aside merely on the ground of her being minor age of 7-years rather alone her statement was enough to establish the charge against the culprits---Nothing was available on record showing that minor witness was tutored by her elders---Nothing adverse had come on record to disbelieve the evidence of victim---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge against the accused through direct and circumstantial evidence---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

Citation Name: 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GUL ZAMAN vs State Ss — 2023 YLRN 30 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported