| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3477 2007 SLD 3477 2007 PLJ 7 |
Shariat Court (AJ&K)
Crl. A. No. 54 of 2006 alongwith Crl. Appeal No. 56 of 2006 and Cr. Ref. No. 55 of 2006, decided on 21.12.2006
IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT, J
Mr. Tahir Aziz Khan, Advocate for convict-appellants. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Janjua, Advocate for Complainant. Syed Tayyab Gilani, Asst. A.G. for State
Crl. A. No. 54 of 2006 alongwith Crl. Appeal No. 56 of 2006 and Cr. Ref. No. 55 of 2006, decided on 21.12.2006
IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT, J
Mr. Tahir Aziz Khan, Advocate for convict-appellants. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Janjua, Advocate for Complainant. Syed Tayyab Gilani, Asst. A.G. for State
IMRAN and others--Appellants
VS
STATE and others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
(i) AJ&K Penal Code-- ----Ss. 302, 324, 337 & 34--Criminal Procedure Code, (V of 1898), S. 410--Conviction & Sentence recorded against accused--Challenged to--Appreciation of evidence--Presence of accused at the spot, time & date of occurrence were admitted by the defence--Eye witnesses had been found `Adil' in purgation, which made their statements more reliable and worthy of credence--It was admitted by the defence that a knife was used as a weapon of offence and not a churri--No mitigating circumstances found--Conviction and sentence of death of main accused upheld, however the amount of Arsh was enhanced upto 1/3 of the total amount of Diyyat. [Pp. 14, 15, 16, 17, 22 & 23] A, B, D, F, H & J (ii) Criminal Jurisprudence-- ----Unchallenged statement of witness--Evidenciary value--Held: If any part of the statement of a witness was not challenged in the cross-examination, it would be considered to have been admitted by the other party. [P. 15] C (iii) Criminal Justice-- ----Investigation--Held: Any carelessness or negligence in investigation cannot be regarded sufficient to demolish the prosecution case if otherwise the offence against accused person stands proved in the light of evidence on record. [P. 17] E (iv) Delay-- ----Registration of case--Delay--Held: Benefit of any delay in filing of a case is available to the accused where the identity of the accused is doubtful or the time is consumed in consultation or to manipulate a story for false implication of some particular individuals--No benefit can be derived by accused in the instant case of delay of 6 hours as his identity was not doubtful. [P. 18] G PLD 1995 SC AJ&K 41; 1996 P.Cr.L.J. Sh. C. AJ&K 1076; MLD 1997 2013; 1998 SCR 244; 2002 SCR 288; 2000 SCR 123; PLD 1984 SC AJ&K 82; 1992 SCR 294; 1993 SCR 199; 1996 SCR 336; 2001 SCR 240; PLD 1979 SC 23; PLD 1983 SC AJK 98 & 211; PLD 1988 SC AJK 134; 1992 SCR 249 & 294; PLJ 2001 SC 743; PLJ 2002 SC 773; 2000 SCR 375; 1978 SCMR 136; 1999 SCMR 1208; PLJ 2003 Cr.C. Lah. 301; 2002 SCR 510 & 2006 SCR 1886, ref. Judgment Since both the appeals filed by the convict-appellants and the complainant alongwith a reference…
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