| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 2037 2011 SLD 2037 2011 SCMR 474 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 308 of 2009, decision dated: 23rd June, 2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., CH. IJAZ AHMED AND, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Petition No. 308 of 2009, decision dated: 23rd June, 2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., CH. IJAZ AHMED AND, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD SALEEM
VS
. MUHAMMAD AZAN and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), S. 129(g)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Reappraisal of evidence---Prosecution evidence, improvements in---Effect---Medical and ocular evidence--Conflict-Non-production of injured witness---Presumption---Enhancing of sentence---Principles---Out of two accused sent for trial, one was convicted and sentenced to death by Trial Court and other was acquitted but High Court acquitted the other accused also---Validity---Prosecution witnesses while appearing in court made improvements in their statements to strengthen prosecution case, such improvements had cast serious doubt on veracity of such witnesses, therefore, High Court was justified to come to the conclusion that such statements were not worthy of reliance---High Court was also justified to come to conclusion that medical evidence was in conflict with ocular evidence, therefore, reliance on such ocular testimony was unsafe---Recovery was also ignored by High Court with cogent reasons---One person was injured during incident but he was not produced by prosecution without sufficient reason, therefore, High Court was justified to presume that had the injured person been produced, he would not have supported prosecution case---For enhancement of sentence, order under appeal should be either perverse or arbitrary or without any substantive reason---Supreme Court did not see any illegality committed by High Court while acquitting accused, as he was acquitted after judicious application of mind and after considering each and every piece of evidence---Supreme Court did not find any infirmity or illegality in findings of innocence recorded by High Court regarding accused---Leave to appeal was refused. Saeed Muhammad Shah's case 1993 SCMR 550; Muhammad Shafique Ahmad's case PLD 1981 SC 472; Bagh Ali's case PLD 1973 SC 321; Zarshad's case 1972 SCMR 644; Darey Khan's case 1972 SCMR 578; Shah Bakhsh's case 1990 SCMR 158; Muhammad Shafqat's case 1970 SCMR 713 and Ghulam Sikandar's case PLD 1985 SC 11 rel. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 540---Power to summon material witness---Additional evidence---Powers of…
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