| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2841 2004 SLD 2841 2004 PLD 371 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 2003, decided on 29th January, 2004.
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDUQUI, C.J., JAVED IQBAL AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M. Bilal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 2003, decided on 29th January, 2004.
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDUQUI, C.J., JAVED IQBAL AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M. Bilal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent
AMAL SHERIN and another
VS
THE STATE through A.G., N.-W.F.P.
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---- ----S. 302(b)---Appraisal of evidence---Trial Court was not justified to reject the eye-witness account furnished by the complainant and other eye-witness merely on the ground of being related inter se and interested, particularly when the accused had failed to establish on that the said witnesses had nourished any grudge or ill-will against them and had deposed with a specific motive---High Court, while reversing the of acquittal passed by Trial Court had advanced cogent: reasons by believing the ocular testimony trustworthy which was corroborated by medical evidence, incriminating recovery from the spot and abscondence of accused-Accused in their statements recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C. had even admitted partly the motive for the occurrence---Finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court was not supported by the evidence on record and in fact was based on gross misreading and misconstruction of evidence and was also speculative in nature---Impugned passed by High Court convicting the accused was maintained accordingly. Saeed Akhtar and others v. The State 2000 SCMR 383 and Muhammad Ali v. Muhammad Yaqoob and 3 others 1998 SCMR 1814 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Related witness ---Principle--Mere relationship of the witnesses with the deceased would not detract from their veracity, who had absolutely no motive of their own to involve the accused. Saeed Akhtar and others v. The State 2000 SCMR 383 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Conviction on ocular testimony alone---Conviction can be recorded even on the statements of the eye-witnesses alone without there being any corroboration, provided their evidence inspires confidence. (d) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---- ----S. 417---Appeal against acquittal---Principles---Finding of acquittal is not sacrosanct if the reasons given are of speculative or artificial in nature or the same is based on no evidence or on misreading or misinterpretation of evidence, `or the conclusions drawn as to the guilt or innocence of accused are perverse resulting into miscarriage of justice.…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492