| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1221 2019 SLD 1221 2019 PLD 527 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 200 of 2019 inCriminal Appeal No. 238-L of 2013, decision & hearing Dated:04-03-2019. (Notice in pursuance of the order passed by thisCourt on 13.02.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 238-L of 2013 toPolice Constable Kh
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Ch. Nusrat Javed Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court along with Khizar Hayat Police Constable in person.
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 200 of 2019 inCriminal Appeal No. 238-L of 2013, decision & hearing Dated:04-03-2019. (Notice in pursuance of the order passed by thisCourt on 13.02.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 238-L of 2013 toPolice Constable Kh
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Ch. Nusrat Javed Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court along with Khizar Hayat Police Constable in person.
NOTICE TO POLICE CONSTBLE KHIZAR HAYAT SON OF HADAIT ULLAH ON ACCOUNT OF HIS FALSE STATEMENT: IN THE MATTER OF
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 194,302(b)
(a) Maxim:--- ----'Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus'---Historical perspective of the phrase 'Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' stated. George Fisher, The Jury's Rise as Lie Decector, 107 Yale L.J. 654 (1997); Thomas Starkie, A Pracical Treatise On The Law Of Evidence, 233 (Boston, Wells & Lilly) (1826); Trial of Hampden (9 Howell's State Trials 1953, 1101 (1684); Trial of Langhom (7 Howell's State Trials 417, 478 (1679); Trial of Coleman (7 Howell's State Trials I, 71 (1678); The Santissima Trinidad (20 U.S. (7 Wheat) 283, 339 (1822); John Henry Wigmore, A Treatise On the Anglo-American System Of Evidence in Trials At Common Law (1940); Barbara J. Shapiro, Beyond Reasonable Doubt and Probable Cause; Historical Perspectives on the Anglo-American Law of Evidence (1991); George Fisher, The Jury's Rise as Lie Detector, 107 Yale L.J. 655 (1997) and California Jury Instructions, Criminal Section 2.21.2 (West 1993) ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 194---Perjury---'Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus', rule of---Applicability in Pakistan---Historically the main reasoning given by the superior Courts in Pakistan for not applying the rule of 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' related to the social conditions prevalent in the country---Superior Courts felt that generally witnesses testifying in criminal cases did not speak the whole truth and had a tendency to exaggerate or economise with the real facts, thus, there was a danger of miscarriage of justice in the sense that a real culprit may go scot free if a court disbelieved the whole testimony on account of reaching the conclusion that the testimony was false in some respect---Such an approach, which involved extraneous and practical considerations, was arbitrary besides being subjective and the same could have drastic consequences for the rule of law and dispensation of justice in criminal matters---Court of law could not grant a licence to a witness to tell lies or to mix truth with falsehood and then take it upon itself to sift grain from chaff when the law of the land made perjury or testifying falsely a culpable offence---Survey of case-law from the superior Courts of Pakistan wherein it was held that the…
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