| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 173 2019 SLD 173 2019 SCMR 79 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 37-L of 2018 and Criminal Petition No. 272-L of 2015, decision & hearing Dated: 15-11-2018. (Against the judgment Dated 09.02.2015 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. As. Nos. 1659, 1954 and Crl. Rev. No. 1005 of 2009 and M
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Agha Intizar Ali Imran, State counsel (in Crl. A. 37-L of 2018). Nasir-ud-Din Khan Nayyer, Advocate Supreme Court and Mrs. Tasneem Amin, Advocate-on-Record (in Crl. P. 272-L of 2015). Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. for the State (in
Criminal Appeal No. 37-L of 2018 and Criminal Petition No. 272-L of 2015, decision & hearing Dated: 15-11-2018. (Against the judgment Dated 09.02.2015 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. As. Nos. 1659, 1954 and Crl. Rev. No. 1005 of 2009 and M
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Agha Intizar Ali Imran, State counsel (in Crl. A. 37-L of 2018). Nasir-ud-Din Khan Nayyer, Advocate Supreme Court and Mrs. Tasneem Amin, Advocate-on-Record (in Crl. P. 272-L of 2015). Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.G. for the State (in
MUNIR AHMAD AND ANOTHER
VS
THE STATE AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b),324,337F(vi)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324 & 337-F(vi)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah munaqqillah---Reappraisal of evidence---Benefit of doubt--- No independent corroboration for ocular and medical evidence---Four persons including the accused were nominated in the FIR, and out of them three, including the accused, were attributed joint role of firing at the deceased---All three co-accused were acquitted by the Courts below---Question which required consideration in such circumstances was whether the evidence which had been disbelieved to the extent of three co-accused who had been acquitted by the courts below could be believed to the extent of the accused---Set of witnesses which had been disbelieved to the extent of acquitted co-accused persons could only be believed to the extent of the accused, if some independent and strong corroboration was available---However in the present case, there was no independent corroboration against the accused as far as the ocular account and medical evidence was concerned---While extending benefit of doubt the accused was also acquitted of the charges framed against him---Appeal filed by accused was allowed accordingly. (b) Criminal trial--- ----'Maxim' 'Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus'---Said principle was not applicable in Pakistan's system designed for dispensation of justice in criminal cases and courts were required to sift grain from the chaff in order to reach at a just conclusion. (c) Criminal trial--- ----Witness---Reliance upon evidence of witnesses disbelieved to extent of co-accused --- If some independent and strong corroboration was available, then the set of witnesses which had been disbelieved to the extent of acquitted co-accused could be believed to the extent of the accused. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE:---.--- Munir Ahmed petitioner was indicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nankana Sahib, in case FIR No.253/2006 dated 21.07.2006 offence under sections 302, 324, 337-F(vi), 148 and 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Syedwala, District Nankana Sahib. Brief facts of the case as disclosed in the FIR (Exh.PB) chalked out…
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