Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 2162 2020 SLD 2162 2020 YLR 1769
Federal Shariat Court
Criminal Appeal No. 5/I of 2019, decision Dated: 16-05-2019.
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, JUSTICE

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

MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND ANOTHERS

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 395,397,412

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 22,133

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss.395, 397 & 412---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 22 & 133---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103--- Robbery and recovery of stolen property---Appreciation of evidence---Joint identification parade---Joint recovery--- Cross-examination, non-reliance of---Benefit of doubt---Five accused persons robbed bank and fled away---Accused persons were arrested during investigation and certain stolen articles were recovered from their joint possession---Joint recovery at the pointation of accused persons could not be used against them---Three accused persons were put to joint identification and the same had lost evidentiary value of identification test---Trial Court did not peruse and consider cross-examination of eye-witnesses and passed against accused persons---Cross-examination was the great legal engine invented for discovery of truth---Cross-examination of eye-witnesses was not an empty formality but was a valuable right and the best method to ascertain the truth---Right of cross-examination from time immemorial was held to be, particularly in criminal cases, a valuable right to the accused---Cross-examination was a weapon which accused person or an advocate on his behalf could wield for the purpose of testing veracity of the statement made by a witness---Concept of benefit of doubt to accused person was deep rooted and prosecution was duty bound to prove its case beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt---If any single or slightest doubt was created, benefit of the same was to go to accused and the same was sufficient to disbelieve prosecution story---Benefit of doubt was to go to accused regardless of the fact whether he had taken any defence plea or not---Federal Shariat Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused persons and acquitted them of the charge---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 103--- Recovery proceedings---Witness of locality---Effect---In order to ensure proper investigation and clear proof, preference was to be given to witnesses of locality, particularly the witnesses who are respectable---Where witnesses are not of the…
🔒
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