| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1977 SLG 110 1977 SLD 110 1977 SCMR 72 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1970, decision dated: 1st April 1974. dates of hearing : 1, 2 and 3 April 1974
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., WAHEEDUDDIN AHMED AND MUHAMMAD GUL, JJ
Muhammad Saleem Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khalilur Rahman, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant Manzur Qadir and Ijaz Hussain Batalvi, Senior Advocates Supreme Court instructed by Maqbul Ahmad Rana, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents M. A.
Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1970, decision dated: 1st April 1974. dates of hearing : 1, 2 and 3 April 1974
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., WAHEEDUDDIN AHMED AND MUHAMMAD GUL, JJ
Muhammad Saleem Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khalilur Rahman, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant Manzur Qadir and Ijaz Hussain Batalvi, Senior Advocates Supreme Court instructed by Maqbul Ahmad Rana, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents M. A.
WAHEEDUDDIN
VS
ALLAH DITTA AND 5 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962)--- Art. 58(3)-Special leave to appeal-Granted by Supreme Court to consider evidence in view of difference of opinion in High Court.[Special leave to appeal]. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 148, 302/149, 307/149 & 323/149-Rioting-Murder-Prosecution witnesses claiming to be eye-witnesses of occurrence not disinterested and either co-sharers with deceased's party in khal or inimical to accused party-Medical evidence giving a lie to prosecution story of shots killing deceased being fired at them after a chase while deceased on ruts and both deceased found injured on chests-Blackening and charring found around injuries of deceased A not supporting testimony of prosecution witness of shots having been fired from a distance of 4 to 5 karams-Empties recovered not matching with weapons taken from accused-All prosecution witnesses guilty of prevarication by trying to introduce new version at trial to fit in with investigation Presence of several prosecution witnesses falsified by circumstance--Dying declaration in-consistent with prosecution version given a" trial, recorded at police station in presence of several persons and not before a Magistrate although sufficient time available-Majority opinion of High Court holding case doubtful, held, neither wrong nor unreasonable in circumstances.-[Evidence]. Abdur Rahman v. The State P L D 1971 Dacca 79, Zabta Khan v. The State P L D 1963 Pesh. 66 and Ghulam Farid v. The State P L D 1966 S C 264 ref. (c) Evidence Act (I of 1872)--- ---S. 32-Dying declaration-Dying statement recorded at police station in presence of deceased's relatives---Always suspect and less worthy of credence than one recorded b~ a Magistrate after excluding relatives.-[Dying declaration]. Ghulam Farid v. The State P L D 1966 S C 264 ref. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-This appeal, by special leave, arises out of a judgment and order of a Division Bench of the former High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore seat, in Criminal Appeal No. 536 of 1965 and Murder Reference No. 149 of 1965. Leave was granted in this case, because, the Division Bench, which heard the appeal and the reference, was divided in its…
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