2004 P Cr (PLP)
AHMAD ALI — Appellant Versus ABDUL HANAN and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AHMAD ALI — Appellant Versus ABDUL HANAN and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (AHMAD ALI — Appellant Versus ABDUL HANAN and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 302 & 307
Correct identification of accused in moonlight in view of the distance between the accused and the eye-witnesses was very difficult, what to say about singling out of a particular accused for the fatal shot out of the three accused standing side by side at the time of firing
Ocular testimony was discrepant and contradictory which had made the prosecution case doubtful at least to the extent of firing the fatal shot by the accused
Delay of eleven hours in reporting the matter to the police in the given circumstances was questionable
Despite the alleged firing of 40/50 shots only one crime empty was recovered from the spot which according to the report of Ballistic Expert was not even fired from the rifle attributed to accused-- Motive for the occurrence was not established by the prosecution and the charge against the accused seemed to be the result of mala fide intention of the complainant
Abscondence of accused per se was not sufficient to establish his guilt in the absence of prosecution evidence of unimpeachable nature
Accused was acquitted in circumstances.
Ss. 302 & 307
Mere abscondence per se is not sufficient for establishing the guilt of an accused person unless the prosecution is able to establish its case through unimpeachable evidence.
Judgment & Decree
Ss. 302 & 307
Correct identification of accused in moonlight in view of the distance between the accused and the eye-witnesses was very difficult, what to say about singling out of a particular accused for the fatal shot out of the three accused standing side by side at the time of firing
Ocular testimony was discrepant and contradictory which had made the prosecution case doubtful at least to the extent of firing the fatal shot by the accused
Delay of eleven hours in reporting the matter to the police in the given circumstances was questionable
Despite the alleged firing of 40/50 shots only one crime empty was recovered from the spot which according to the report of Ballistic Expert was not even fired from the rifle attributed to accused-- Motive for the occurrence was not established by the prosecution and the charge against the accused seemed to be the result of mala fide intention of the complainant
Abscondence of accused per se was not sufficient to establish his guilt in the absence of prosecution evidence of unimpeachable nature
Accused was acquitted in circumstances. Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology by Modi, 1963 Edn. p.60; Muzaffar v. The State PLJ 1975 Cr.C. (Lah.) 244; Anara v. The State 1988 MLD 237 and 1968 PCr.LJ 1077 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Ss. 302 & 307
Mere abscondence per se is not sufficient for establishing the guilt of an accused person unless the prosecution is able to establish its case through unimpeachable evidence. Abdul Fayyaz Khan and Qazi Zakiuddin for Appellant. Malik Ahmed Jan, Dy.A.-G. for the State. Muhammad Hussain for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 6th November, 2003.