| Citation(s) |
|---|
| SLG 1893 (2019) 124 SLD 1893 (2019) 123 SCMR 1412 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 67-L and 68-L of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 09-05-2018. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.11.2013 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeals Nos. 148 and 202 of 2010 and CSR No. 3-T of 2010)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Naseer-ud-Din Khan Nayyar, Advocate Supreme Court (in Criminal Appeal No. 67-L of 2017). Miss Najma Parveen, Advocate Supreme Court (in Criminal Appeal No. 68-L of 2017).
Respondent(s) by: Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional Prosecutor-Genera
Criminal Appeals Nos. 67-L and 68-L of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 09-05-2018. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.11.2013 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeals Nos. 148 and 202 of 2010 and CSR No. 3-T of 2010)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Naseer-ud-Din Khan Nayyar, Advocate Supreme Court (in Criminal Appeal No. 67-L of 2017). Miss Najma Parveen, Advocate Supreme Court (in Criminal Appeal No. 68-L of 2017).
Respondent(s) by: Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional Prosecutor-Genera
SAFDAR BALOCH ALIAS ALI AND ANOTHER
VS
THE STATE AND OTHERS
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,324,365A
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 7(e)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss.365-A, 324 & 34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7(e)---Kidnapping for ransom, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention, act of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Statement of the child-abductee, statedly of 7/8 years of age at the relevant time, certainly required a very cautious scrutiny; he was reticent on important details of the episode, relating to the present accused persons---Being of an impressionable age, and having experienced a kidnapping, the abductee's susceptibility to tuition could not be ruled out--- Argument that crime report was recorded after arrest of co-accused and the accused persons were named therein on the basis of information other than purportedly laid by the complainant was not entirely beside the mark---While the occurrence could not possibly be denied, nonetheless, nomination of the accused persons on complainant's knowledge was a circumstance fraught with doubts---Complainant claimed to have seen the accused persons in a marriage ceremony few days prior to the kidnapping---Crowded ceremony would provide little space/opportunity to the complainant to remember the faces and names of the participants and thus once the source of information about accused persons' participation in the crime was found suspect it would be unsafe to rely upon the testimony of a vulnerable witness/abductee alone, particularly when the accused persons were not arrested alongside the co-accused---Prosecution's case against the accused persons could not be viewed as beyond reasonable doubt and thus their conviction could not be maintained without potential risk of error---Appeals were allowed and accused persons were acquitted of the charge of murder. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Conviction---Grounds---Criminal liability was to be essentially settled on evidentiary certainty and not on moral satisfaction or factualities incompatible with evidence based upon truth. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.--- Criminal Appeal No.67-L/2017 by Safdar Baloch alias Ali and Criminal Appeal No.68-L/2017 by Aziz Khan, through leave of the Court, arisen out of incident dated 15.12.2005 are bound by…
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