2022 SCMR 2012
Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Both witnesses of the ocular account were subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record---Both said witnesses remained consistent on each and every material point and successfully advanced the prosecution case so far as it related to the death of deceased---Said eye-witnesses had given a reasonable explanation for their presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time and made consistent statements before the Trial Court---Medical evidence available on the record corroborated the ocular account so far as the nature, time, locale and impact of the injury on the person of the deceased was concerned---Motive set up by the prosecution was based upon a suspicion of illicit relations between the deceased and sister of accused, which had been admitted by the accused through his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C.---Conviction of accused for qatl-i-amd was maintained---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and partly allowed.
Qatl-i-amd---Diminished liability, doctrine of---Scope---Diminished liability is a legal doctrine that absolves an accused person of part of the liability for his criminal act if he suffers from such state of mind as to substantially impair his responsibility in committing or being a party to an alleged criminal act.
Recovery of weapon---Scope---Recovery of weapon of offence is inconsequential where neither the crime empty nor the weapon is sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory
Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Murder of sister's alleged paramour committed under the impulses of 'ghairat' and grave and sudden provocation---Diminished liability---Conviction under section 302 (b), P.P.C. altered to one under section 302 (c), P.P.C.---Deceased (alleged paramour) was murdered when the accused had seen him with his sister in an objectionable position---Said question was also put to the eye-witnesses but they could not deny the same---Such fact had also been mentioned in the crime report---Stance of the accused had been supported by the statement of doctor who conducted postmortem examination of the sister of accused---Doctor candidly stated that "hymen was totally absent"---Admittedly, the place where the deceased was done to death was a school where no activity was going on when the occurrence took place---Wall of the school from the northern side was common wall between the school and the house of the accused and the stairs were situated adjacent to the above said wall---During cross-examination, the Investigating Officer admitted that it was the first version of accused that he took the life of the deceased under grave and sudden provocation as he had seen him in a compromising position with his sister---Record clearly revealed that there was no conventional enmity between the parties and the only reason as to why the accused could have committed the murders was nothing but him having seen his sister in a compromising position with the deceased---In the present case, as the murders were committed under the impulses of ghairat and grave and sudden provocation, the doctrine of diminished liability would be squarely attracted providing mitigation to the punishment awarded to the accused---Present case was a case of grave and sudden provocation which attracted the provisions of section 302 (c), P.P.C.---Conviction of accused under section 302 (b), P.P.C. was altered into one under section 302 (c), P.P.C. and he was sentenced to imprisonment for the period which he had already undergone--
0 Comments