| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3358 2003 SLD 3358 2003 PLD 355 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1 and Confirmation Case No. 1 of 1998, decided on 20th February, 2003. dates of hearing: 22nd, 28th January; 4th and 14th February, 2003.
SHABBIR AHMED AND AZIZULLAH M. MEMON, JJ
Mahmood A. Qureshi for Appellant. Habib Ahmed, Asstt. A.G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 1 and Confirmation Case No. 1 of 1998, decided on 20th February, 2003. dates of hearing: 22nd, 28th January; 4th and 14th February, 2003.
SHABBIR AHMED AND AZIZULLAH M. MEMON, JJ
Mahmood A. Qureshi for Appellant. Habib Ahmed, Asstt. A.G. for the State.
MUHAMMAD FEROZE
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----- ----Ss. 302 & 308---Appreciation of evidence---Accused had killed his wife and his son and daughter being his direct descendants as well as "Wall" of the victim, he could be convicted only under S.308, P.P.C. for Qatl-i-Amd not liable to Qisas and not under S.302 P.P.C. as Qisas or Ta'zir--Conviction and sentence of accused under S.302, P.P.C., therefore, was coram non judice----Evidence of recovery was hearsay and the positive Chemical Report in the absence of blood on the incriminating articles could not connect the same with the crime and had no evidentiary value---Incident appeared' to be an unwitnessed one ---F.I.R. had been lodged after consultation and deliberation with delay---Child witness, the only eyewitness of the occurrence, did not implicate the accused at the earliest opportunity when he disclosed the occurrence to the prosecution witnesses and subsequently at the trial he implicated his own father after remaining in custody and care of the said witnesses---Testimony of the child witness, therefore, could not be made the basis of conviction---Accused was acquitted on benefit of doubt in circumstances. Khalil-uz-Zaman v. Supreme Appellate Court, Lahore and 4 others PLD 1994 SC 885; Muhammad Ikram v. The State 1999 SCMR 406; Dil Bagh Hussain v. The State 2001 SCMR 232; Abdul Zahir v. State (2000) 21 AC 301; Muhammad Ahmad v. The State 1995 SCMR 127; Abbas Ali Shah v. Emperor AIR 1933 Lah. 667; Sona Miah v. The State PLD 1960 Dacca 396; Sultan and another v. The State PLD 1965 (W.P) Kar. 615; The State v. Mahmood Ashraf Khan and another 1987 PCr.LJ 2144; Sarkar's Law of Evidence, 15th Edn., 1999, p.1959; Dr. Kenny Downing's Profession of Laws of Englander, Cambridge University, 'Outlines of Criminal Law, p.386; Manni v. Emperor AIR 1930 Oudh 406 and Jalwanti Lodhin v. The State AIR 1953 Pat. 246 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.3---Appreciation of evidence---Child witness---Testimony of a child witness should only be accepted: after great caution and circumspection, because he is most susceptible to tutoring and on account of-fear and inducement he can be…
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