| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 6582 2011 SLD 6582 2011 PCRLJ 1185 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Revision No. 771 of 2010, decided on 18th August, 2010.
Before Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, J
Sheikh Tanveer Hussain for Petitioner. Ishaque Masih Naz, Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab for the State. Malik Riaz Ahmed for the Complainant.
Criminal Revision No. 771 of 2010, decided on 18th August, 2010.
Before Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, J
Sheikh Tanveer Hussain for Petitioner. Ishaque Masih Naz, Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab for the State. Malik Riaz Ahmed for the Complainant.
NASRULLAH---Petitioner
VS
THE STATE and another---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 412
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 439
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 412---Dishonestly receiving property stolen in the commission of a dacoity---Appreciation of evidence---F.I.R. had been lodged after a delay of two days---Complainant had been introducing new sets of culprits through his subsequent supplementary statements---Evidence regarding recovery of stolen articles from the accused was highly discrepant on very material aspects, viz. marking of the same by Investigating Officer, producing the same as case property in the court and identification of the same by the prosecution witnesses---Even also the accused and his acquitted co-accused had been brought at the place of recovery together in the same van and the recovery had been effected from the one and the same village---Recovery appeared to have been planted on the accused---Evidence on record did not inspire confidence---Fatal discrepancies and contradictions in recovery evidence had also escaped the notice of the Appellate Court---Accused was acquitted in circumstances. Syed Manzoor Hussain Shah v. Syed Agha Husain Naqvi and another 1983 SCMR 775; Abdul Rehman Bajwa v. Sultan and 9 others PLD 1981 SC 522; Anwar v. Crown PLD 1955 FC 185 and Abdur Rashid Khondkar v. Chandu Matbar and 15 others PLD 1974 SC 795 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 439---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court is very wide and it may be exercised whenever facts calling for its exercise are brought to the notice of the court. Syed Manzoor Hussain Shah v. Syed Agha Husain Naqvi and another 1983 SCMR 775 ref. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 439---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---High Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction cannot only go into evidence and reverse the findings and adjudge the propriety of the judgment, rather can also evaluate the reasonability and correctness of conviction and sentence. Abdul Rehman Bajwa v. Sultan and 9 others PLD 1981 SC 522; Anwar v. Crown PLD 1955 FC 185 and Abdur Rashid Khondkar v. Chandu Matbar and 15 others PLD 1974 SC 795 ref. ORDER SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE:---.--- Through the instant criminal…
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