| Case ID |
16320a17-3ea4-4ed6-9f1f-be24535c5343 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeals Nos. 23157, 24016 and Murder Refe |
| Decision Date |
Mar 09, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
Mar 09, 2022 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court acquitted the appellants, Anjum Latif and Amjad Latif, of all charges related to the murder and associated offenses. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, primarily due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies, a lack of corroborative evidence, and the failure to establish a clear motive for the alleged crime. The court emphasized the principle of 'benefit of doubt,' stating that any reasonable doubt regarding the guilt of the accused must be resolved in their favor. Consequently, the convictions and sentences from the trial court were set aside, and the appellants were released from custody. |
| Summary |
In the case of Anjum Latif and Amjad Latif vs. The State, the Lahore High Court examined several critical elements surrounding the charges of murder and related offenses under the Penal Code. The appellants were accused of causing injuries to three individuals, one of whom succumbed to their injuries. However, the prosecution's case was riddled with inconsistencies, particularly in the testimonies of eyewitnesses who were related to the deceased. The court highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence and the need for credible witness statements. The testimonies of deaf and dumb witnesses raised additional concerns regarding their reliability and the process used to record their statements. The court noted that the prosecution failed to establish a clear motive for the attack, further weakening its case. Ultimately, the Lahore High Court ruled in favor of the appellants, upholding the principle that any reasonable doubt must benefit the accused. This decision underscores the critical importance of thorough and reliable evidence in criminal trials, particularly in cases involving serious charges like murder. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar,
Sardar Ahmed Naeem
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Anjum Latif,
Amjad Latif
|
| Respondents |
The STATE,
Muhammad Ejaz,
Aman Ullah,
Azhar Shamim,
Muhammad Imtiaz,
Aftab Ali
|
| Citations |
2023 SLD 1036,
2023 CLC 735
|
| Other Citations |
Syed Saeed Muhammad Shah and another v. The State 1993 SCMR 550,
Muhammad Asif v. The State 2017 SCMR 486,
Rahat Ali v. The State 2010 SCMR 584,
Muhammad Mansha v. The State 2019 SCMR 64,
Meesala Ramakrishan v. State of A. P, 1994(2), R.C.R (Criminal) 675,
Ah Soi (1926(27) Crl.LJ 805),
Iftikhar Hussain and another v. State 2004 SCMR 1185,
Sarfraz alias Sappi and 2 others v. The State 2000 SCMR 1758,
Akhtar Ali and others v. The State 2008 SCMR 6,
Mst. Nazia Anwar v. The State and others 2018 SCMR 911,
Najaf Ali Shah v. The State 2021 SCMR 736
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302,
337-A(i),
337-F(iv),
337-L(2),
148,
149
|