MOINUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) During course of arguments in the appeal today and while reading the impugned judgment we find that the learned Trial Judge has not crystallized the incriminating circumstances held established by him against the accused.

(2.) The discussion in the impugned decision is penned in a most unsatisfactory manner and only after putting in some labour, it could be gathered that the learned Trial Judge has returned the verdict of guilt on the finding that the appellant got infatuated with the wife of the deceased, proved through the letter Ex.PW-8/B held proved to be written by the accused to Rubina, the wife of the deceased through the testimony of Rubina and the report of a handwriting expert.

(3.) The second incriminating circumstance emerging, is through the testimony of Rubina that in the morning of 16.9.2006 she saw her husband and the accused together outside Hazi Guest House; the place where she and her husband were staying and this was the deceased last seen alive.