Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 1401 2012 SLD 1401 2012 SCMR 267
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 221 and 222 of 2010, decision dated: 5-10-2011
TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, 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 MUMTAZ and another

VS

THE STATE and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to reappraise the entire evidence and to examine contentions raised by accused. Syed Hamid Mukhtar Shah v. Muhammad Azam and 2 others 2005 SCMR 427; Zulfiqar Ali v The State 2008 SCMR 796 and Nazir Ahmed v The State 2009 SCMR 523 ref (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S.302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Reappraisal of evidence---Prompt F.I.R.---Concurrent findings of fact by two courts below---Death sentence awarded to accused by Trial Court was converted into imprisonment for life by High Court---Validity---Case of prompt F.I.R., lodged within 15 minutes of the occurrence where accused were specifically named with a specific role attributed to them and motive was alleged---Promptitude with which the matter was reported ruled out possibility of false implication and even otherwise it was repellent to common sense that complainant would let off real culprit and involve someone else---Both the witnesses remained consistent during the trial on all material particulars of prosecution case in so far as the role attributed to accused was concerned---Testimony of prosecution witnesses was corroborated by medical evidence, which was consistent with ocular account in so far as the weapon, locale of injury and time which lapsed between the injury and postmortem examination were concerned---Concurrent assessment of evidence made by two courts below culminating in finding of guilt was not arbitrary, capricious or against the evidence led by prosecution---Supreme Court declined to interfere in conviction and sentence awarded to accused by the High Court---Appeal was dismissed. Promilla v. Safeer Alam 2000 SCMR 1166; Shaheb Ali v The State PLD 1970 SC 447; Muhammad Rafiq v. The State 1971 SCMR 378; Ghulam Muhammad v The State 1972 SCMR 393; Ameer Umar v. The State 1976 SCMr 338; Muhammad Jamal v The State 1997 SCMR 1595 and Muhammad Shafique and others v. Akhtar Shah and others 1997 SCMR 1964 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Motive---Scope---Motive is not a condition precedent to warrant a finding of guilt. Ahmad Khan v.…
🔒
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