Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 1228 2001 SLD 1228 2001 PCRLJ 1766
Quetta High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos.(S)91 and 32 of 2000, decided on 20th April, 2001.
TARIQ MEHMOOD AND AHMED KHAN LASHARI, JJ
Nazir Ahmed for Appellants (in both Criminal Appeals). Anwarul Haq Chaudhry on behalf of Muhammad Mohsin Javed for the Complainant (in both Criminal Appeals). Haji Ghulam Mustafa Mengal, Asstt. A. G. for the State (in both Criminal Appeals).

MUHAMMAD KHAN and others--Appellants

VS

THE STATE and others --Respondents

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302,302(b),302(c)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)     S. 302 Appreciation of evidence Belated statements of witnesses ¬Credibility of a witness is looked with serious suspicion if his statement under S.161, Cr.P.C. or 164, Cr.P.C. is recorded with delay without offering any plausible explanation.   (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)     S. 302 Appreciation of evidence Principle Maxim ‘falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ is not applicable in the country for discarding the evidence of a witness as a whole and hence so much of his evidence which is credible can be accepted.   (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)     S. 302(b) Appreciation of evidence Last seen evidence Circumstance that the deceased was last seen with the accused is a reliable piece of evidence if corroborated by other pieces of circumstantial evidence which are interlinked and which clearly connect the accused with the commission of offence.   (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)     S. 302(b) Appreciation of evidence Last seen evidence Strong circumstantial evidence in the shape of last seen evidence appearing against the accused was supported by the recovery of the rifle which matched with the empties recovered from the spot and the motive Accused, therefore, was proved p have committed the cold blooded double murder which was premeditated and he had not been able to claim his innocence on any hypothesis despite fair trial Nobody could be allowed to take law in his hand in the name of so called ‘Ghairat’ which was not only against Injunctions of Islam but law and Constitution too and illegal century old customary practice could not be preferred over the dictates of Allah and Hadith of Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) Life could not be taken away in Islam or in law on the basis of mere accusations or rumours or otherwise ‘Siah Kari’ had nothing to do with the teachings of Islam Conviction of accused under S.302(b), P.P.C. was consequently upheld, but sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to him by Trial Court was converted into sentence of death in circumstances.   PLD 1996 SC 305; Abdul Zahir v. The State 2000 SCMR 406; PLD 1989 SC 633; Holy Quran: Sura Al Ahzab,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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