Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 6702 2011 SLD 6702 2011 PCRLJ 1801
Sindh High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No. S-200 of 2006, decided on 27th July, 2011.Dates of hearing: 15th April and 3rd June, 2011.
Before Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J
Nisar Ahmed Unar and Miss Nasira Shaikh for Appellants. Syed Meeral Shah, D.P.-G. for the State.

GAMOON and others---Appellants

VS

THE STATE---Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b)

(a) Pakistan Prisons Rules, 1978--- ----R. 140---"Imprisonment for life"---Meaning---Imprisonment for life means twenty five years rigorous imprisonment and every lifer prisoner would undergo a minimum of fifteen years substantive imprisonment---In the present case, the portion of substantive sentence served by the accused being less than fifteen years, in view of R.140 of Pakistan Prisons Rules, 1978, accused could not be released on the sentence already undergone. (b) Penal Code (XLV 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)--- Qatl-e-amd--- Appreciation of evidence--- Interested witness---Scope---Evidence of interested witness was not fatal, unless the evidence of such witnesses who were the relatives of the deceased, was not inspiring confidence---If the ocular evidence was found trustworthy and inspiring confidence, same could not be discarded for the reasons that the witnesses were interested or related inter se---Mere relationship of a witness would not mean that the witness was interested and his testimony was not liable to be believed when same was found reliable, trustworthy and confidence inspiring on the material points---Mere fact of relationship would not necessarily render a witness's account of occurrence subject of doubt---Interested witness would mean a witness who had a motive for falsely implicating an accused---Statement of witness must be in consonance with the probabilities fitting in the circumstances of the case and also inspiring confidence in the mind of a reasonable prudent man---If such elements were present, then the statement of worst enemy of an accused could be accepted and relied upon without corroboration, but if said elements were missing then the statement of a pious man could be rejected without second thought---All pieces of evidence should be so linked that it should give picture of complete chain, one corner of which should touch neck of deceased and other corner to neck of accused---Failure of one link would destroy entire chain. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Complainant in his cross-examination had stated that there were 20 houses in the village concerned, but…
🔒
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