| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1976 SLG 145 1976 SLD 145 1976 PLD 300 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
SALAHUDDIN AHMED AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SALAHUDDIN AHMED AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
PIRAN DITTA AND 3 others
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal trial--- Practice and procedure-Evaluation of evidence-Rule of prudence requiring independent corroboration of ocular testimony-Attracted only while dealing with testimony of interested witnesses.-[Practice and procedure-Witness-Evidence]. (b) Criminal trial- Practice and procedure-Evaluation of evidence-Mere relationship. of prosecution witness with deceased-Not per se good enough to brand witness with interestedness-Exception to rule : When parties have a previous background of enmity and witness also inimical and hostile.-[Practice and procedure-Evidence-Witness]. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- S. 302/149/148-[Murder case]-Maxim : Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus-Indivisibility of credibility, doctrine of-Murder committed in broad day-light, witnessed by three eye-witnesses, elaborate report promptly lodged at Police Station specifically naming all accused including petitioners-Nature and number of injuries suffered by deceased in conformity with prosecution version and establishing use of weapons wielded by all assailants except one-No previous bad blood between parties-High Court, having regard to rather large number of accused persons mentioned by prosecution witnesses and in order to avoid any possible false implication, and by way of abundant caution, looking for corroboration of ocular testimony and such corroboration being available in case of petitioners alone maintaining their conviction but acquitting others-Acquittal of an accused for reason of recovery of gun attributed to him having been disbelieved, held, would not attract doctrine of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus-Such doctrine, even otherwise, on more realistic view of social conditions and particularly deteriorating standards of truthfulness appropriately substituted by superior Courts, by doctrine of separating grain from chaff-Principle of indivisibility of credibility, held, not attracted in circumstances-Conviction maintained.-(MaximWitness) (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- -- Ss. 302/149/148 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 367-Judgment, contents of-Sessions Judge giving no reason whatever for awarding lesser penalty in case of triple murder and High…
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