 |
Abolition of the killer
The court said that the prosecution in the murder case was beyond doubt, as the pistol was recovered from him, the forensic report proved to be true and the relationship with the person involved in the crime, and the brother. Halfia saw him fleeing after the incident, the court dismissed the appeal and pronounced the sentence.
2024 SCMR 1413 |
یہ کیس سپریم کورٹ آف پاکستان کے ایک فیصلہ 2024 S C M R 1413 پر مبنی ہے، جس میں چنزیب اختر اور دیگر کے خلاف مقدمہ زیر غور آیا۔ درج ذیل نکات اس فیصلے سے متعلق اہم ہیں:
1. کیس کی نوعیت اور شواہد
جرم: دفعہ 302(b) کے تحت قتل عمد۔
شواہد:
ملزم نے خود پولیس اسٹیشن میں حاضر ہو کر گرفتاری دی۔
ملزم کی نشاندہی پر ایک .30 بور پستول زیر تعمیر گیراج سے برآمد کی گئی۔
فارنزک رپورٹ کے مطابق جائے وقوعہ سے ملنے والے کارتوس ملزم کی برآمد شدہ پستول سے میچ کر گئے۔
ملزم کے بھائی نے ایک حلفیہ بیان کے ذریعے یہ بتایا کہ اس نے ملزم کو وقوعہ کے بعد فرار ہوتے دیکھا۔
2. عدالتی فیصلے کی بنیاد
استغاثہ نے کیس شک و شبہ سے بالاتر ثابت کیا۔
ملزم کے حق میں کوئی مواد پیش نہیں کیا گیا، بلکہ ملزم کے بھائی کا بیان بھی ملزم کے خلاف تھا۔
عدالت نے استغاثہ کے دلائل کو قبول کرتے ہوئے ملزم کی درخواستِ نظرثانی مسترد کر دی اور سزا برقرار رکھی۔
3. سزا میں نرمی کے اصول
اگر قتل کا مقصد (motive) ثابت نہ ہو اور قتل کے لیے پہلے سے ارادہ (premeditation) نہ ہو، تو سزا میں نرمی ہو سکتی ہے۔
عدالت نے نظائر (precedents) کا حوالہ دیا:
2011 SCMR 1165
2013 SCMR 1602
2024 SCMR 128
4. وکلاء
درخواست گزاران کے وکلاء: سید ذوالفقار عباس نقوی اور چودھری نصیر احمد طاہر۔
ریاست کی طرف سے وکیل: فوزی ظفر۔
نتیجہ
عدالت نے فیصلہ دیا کہ جرم ثابت ہونے پر ملزم کی سزا میں کوئی کمی نہیں کی جا سکتی۔ درخواست مسترد کر دی گئی۔
2024 S C M R 1413
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Naeem Akhtar Afghan, JJ
CHANZEB AKHTAR and another---Petitioners
Versus
The STATE and others---Respondents
Criminal Petitions Nos.548 and 602 of 2020, decided on 21st May, 2024.
(Against the judgment dated 15.04.2020 passed by the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad passed in Criminal Appeal No.125 of 2018, Jail Appeal No.130 of 2018 and Murder Reference No.8 of 2018)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---
----S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---After lodging the FIR promptly, the police party started its investigation---On the day after the incident, the Investigating Officer arrested the petitioner who himself surrendered in the police station and during the course of investigation the petitioner disclosed about the weapon of offence, .30 bore pistol, concealed in an under construction garage in the haveli near to his house and on his pointation said pistol along with magazine was taken into possession---Investigating Officer received a sworn affidavit by the brother of the petitioner qua the alleged incident---Investigating Officer also dispatched two firearm empties of .30 bore pistol, three lead bullets from the dead body and .30 bore pistol to the Forensic Science Laboratory---As per report of Forensic Science Laboratory, two crime cartridges collected by the Investigating Officer from the place of occurrence were found wedded with the pistol recovered on the pointation of the petitioner---Petitioner was last seen by brother of the deceased fleeing away from the place of occurrence after commission of offence as said witness was residing in a house adjacent to the petitioner's house and the said incident was also notified by the petitioner's brother through an affidavit---There was nothing on record in favour of the petitioner as his own brother through an affidavit had submitted that he had seen the petitioner fleeing away from the place of occurrence after commission of an offence and thereafter informed the complainant of the case about the incident---Prosecution had established its case against the petitioner beyond any shadow of doubt---Petition was dismissed and leave was refused.
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---
----S. 302(b)--- Qatl-i-amd--- Sentence, quantum of--- Mitigating circumstances---Motive not proved---In the absence of premeditation to commit murder where motive is not proved by the prosecution, the same may be considered as a mitigating factor in order to reduce the quantum of sentence in cases involving capital punishment.
Iftikhar Mehmood and another v. Qaiser Iftikhar and others 2011 SCMR 1165; Zeeshan Afzal alias Shani and another v. The State and others 2013 SCMR 1602 and Muhammad Yasin and another v. The State and others 2024 SCMR 128 ref.
Syed Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court (in Cr.P. No.548 of 2020) and Ch. Naseer Ahmed Tahir, Advocate Supreme Court (in Cr. P. No.602 of 2020) for Petitioners.
Fauzi Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court/State counsel.
For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp
Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.
Comments
Post a Comment