Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 364 1975 SLD 364 1975 PLD 227
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 1972, decided on 2nd April 1975. dates of hearing: 9th and 10th December 1974. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 21st February 1969, in Criminal Appeal No
ANWARUL HAQ, MUHAMMAD GUL AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ABDUR RASHID

VS

UMID ALI AND 2 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Evidence­---- Appreciation of evidence-Motive-Value of. Evidence of motive is not only relevant but also often helpful both to the Investigating Agency as well as the Court. Its importance, however, depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. For the police it steers and determines the course of investigation. Its established existence and strong nature proved by reliable evidence when put in the scales alongwith tote ovular and other evidence does quite often tend to set at rest some lurking suspicions and satisfy the Judicial conscience. Of course there may be cases where even the strongest motive may be wholly inapt owing to absence or weakness of direct evidence. Conversely the weakness of motive or even its conspicuous absence might not be helpful to the accused against whom unimpeachable ocular evidence is available. (b) Evidence- -- Appreciation of evidence-Witnesses, discrepancies in statements of-Effect. Some discrepancies are inevitably bound to occur on account of lapse of memory owing to the intervening period which was more than 16 months In the instant case. Of course, there have been cases where thoroughly drilled and well-tutored witnesses after going through several rehearsals made statements which were almost verbatim repetitions of their Police statements as well as those of each other at the trial and the Courts have been very rightly sceptical about such parrot-like reproductions. It is only the material discrepancies coming into conflict with the natural probabi­lities that militate against the credibility of witnesses justifying the rejection of their testimony. (c) Evidence- "----Appreciation of evidence.-Witness-Interested witness-Independent corroboration of testimony of interested witness-Generally Insisted upon as a rule--Such rule, yet, not inflexible. Although as a rule of prudence, the Courts have more often than not insisted on independent corroboration before placing reliance on the testimony of interested witnesses yet it is not an inflexible rule to be rigidly and un-exceptionally applied. There might be cases in which the witnesses related to the deceased might be otherwise quite natural furnishing direct…
🔒
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