| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1972 SLG 336 1972 SLD 336 1972 SCMR 642 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 28-P of 1971, decision dated: 8th December 1972.
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
S. Usman Ali Shah, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State.
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 28-P of 1971, decision dated: 8th December 1972.
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
S. Usman Ali Shah, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State.
DALAI
VS
THE STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 337 Accomplice Evidence- Corroboration- Corroborative evidence need not by itself be sufficient to warrant conviction-Such evidence should only be such as to confirm co-accused's statement implicating other accused Fact of accused having demanded a ransom for recovery of kidnapped child, held, confirmed confessional statement of confessing accused-Confessional statement fully implicating accused and substantially corroborated in material particulars both as regards incident and participation of accused appellant in incident, Supreme Court saw no reason to interfere with conviction-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 363. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-The petitioner in this case was tried along with two others. He and Niamat Khan were charged under section 363, P. P. C. and one Mir Hawas Din alias Burmullah was charged with abetment under section 363/109, P. P. C. for the kidnapping of an infant daughter of one Hassan Khan at about 9 a.m. of the 9th of December 1968, from outside her house in Mohallah Sheikh Saleem Bannu City. Hassan Khan lodged information about the disappearance of his child on the next day at Bannu Police Station. The petitioner and Niamat Khan were arrested on the 21st of December 1968, but Mir Hawas Din could not be apprehended until the 16th of September 1969. Niamat Khan made a detailed confessional statement two days after his arrest and stuck to this even at the trial. The main evidence against the petitioner was the confessional statement of co-accused Niamat Khan. This obviously could only be utilised against the other accused if it was corroborated in material particulars. This corroboration was found to have been furnished by the oral testimonies of several witnesses. Mustafa Kama] and Mohabat Khan gave evidence to the effect that the present petitioner had actually approached Mustafa Kamal, while he was present in the shop of Mohabat Khan along with his servant Amaldin, and offered to recover the kidnapped girl on payment of Rs.6,000 by way of ransom. Another piece of corroboration was furnished by Muhammad Rafiq who actually paid Rs.100 to Mir Hawas Din for producing some token indicating…
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