| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2289 2019 SLD 2289 2019 PLJ 75 |
Peshawar High Court
Crl.A. No. 46-D/2014, decision & hearing Dated: 13.02.2019.
SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JUSTICE SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Saif-ur-Rehman Khan, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Salimullah Khan Ranazai, Advocate and Mr. Ilyas Ahmad Damani, Advocate
Crl.A. No. 46-D/2014, decision & hearing Dated: 13.02.2019.
SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JUSTICE SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Saif-ur-Rehman Khan, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Salimullah Khan Ranazai, Advocate and Mr. Ilyas Ahmad Damani, Advocate
MIRA JAN
VS
MIR ABBAS, ETC.
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 173,265-C,342,417
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,302,427
Appraisement of evidence-- ----Appraisement of the evidence of eyewitnesses has to be based upon a full consideration and evaluation of all circumstances appearing in case where there is fatal absence of physical circumstances to connect accused person with crime and there is a motive and in such a situation, ocular evidence must, in order to carry conviction on a capital charge, come from un¬impeachable source and if such source is not available, then it must be supported by some strong circumstance which would enable Court to overcome inherent doubt which such evidence must necessarily create. PLD 1973 SC 321, ref. Quality of evidence-- ----Principle of justice--There is no two opinion about fact that cardinal principle of justice always laid emphasis on quality of evidence which must be of first degree and sufficient enough to dispel apprehension of Court with regard to implication of innocent persons alongwith guilty one by prosecution, otherwise, golden principle of justice would come into play that even a single doubt if found reasonable would be sufficient to acquit accused, giving him/them benefit of doubt because bundle of doubts are not required to extend legal benefit to accused. NLR 1995 Cr. SC 694, rel. Abscondence-- ----Adverting to abscondence of accused, it is not denied that abscondence alone cannot be a substitute for real evidence because people do abscond though falsely charged in order to save themselves from agony of protracted trial and also to avoid duress and torture at hands of police--In instant case, abscondence is meaningless because it can neither remove defects of oral evidence, nor is by itself sufficient to bring guilt home to accused. 1996 PCr.LJ 394, 1999 SCMR 1220, PLD 1977 SC 41 & 2002 MLD Peshawar 347, ref. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 417--Appeal against acquittal--Scope of--Benefit of doubt--Appreciation of evidence--It is now settled that standards of assessing evidence in appeal against acquittal are quite different from those laid down from appeal against conviction--There is a marked difference between appraisement of evidence in appeal against conviction and in appeal against acquittal--In…
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