Case Details

Citation(s)
1977 SLG 194 1977 SLD 194 1977 SCMR 393
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 1976, decision dated: 3rd July 1977. dates of hearing : 31st May; 1st and 2nd June 1977
ANWARUL HAQ, DORAB PATEL AND MUHAMMAD HALEEM, JJ
FazaliHnq, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant Nasim Hassan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 Sh. Riaz Ahmad, Assistant Advocate General Punjab fo

HAQ NAWAZ

VS

SULTAN KHAN AND 2 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Appeal (criminal)--- ----- Appreciation of evidence-Ocular evidence heavily tainted by enmity-Appreciation of evidence by High Court, held, could be challenged only if evidence about enmity misread by High Court: [Evidence]. (b) Criminal trial--- ------- Evidence-Corroboration-Nature of corroboratory evidence requir­ed to prove guilt of accused-Must depend not only upon whether witnesses are interested or disinterested but also upon whether witnesses are witnesses of truth.-[Evidence]. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- -----S. 302/34-[Murder-case]-Appreciation of evidence-Ten members of accused party roped in for murdering deceased and injuring his wife-F. I. R. lodged after 5 hours-Eye-witnesses account of deceased having gone up to roof of his house too absurd in view of number of assailants and deceased having been an easy target in broad day light-Deceased alleged to have gone on roof with a gun and to have fired shots and assailants alleged to have fired 40-50 shots yet no shot, bullet, or empty recovered from place of occurrence nor gun of deceased found on roof when police visited scene-Discre­pancies between statements of eye-witnesses and circumstantial evidence-Site plan showing it difficult for witnesses to identify assailants-Eye-witnesses, in circumstances of case, not in position to pinpoint as to which accused caused fatal injuries to deceased Medical evidence establishing deceased not having been facing assailants as alleged by prosecution-Complainant party having had other enemies as well-Long standing enmity between parties ­Prosecution evidence not devoid of deliberate falsehoods-Evidence of motive not corroborating prosecution version-Abscondence denied by accused and also not proved by production of proclamation notice, warrant of arrest, person deputed to effect arrest and accused themselves appearing before police within one month of occurrence­ Abscondence in circumstance no corroboration of ocular evidence­ Ocular evidence intensely tainted by enmity not having been corro­borated by reliable and independent evidence, case held not free from doubt and possible for deceased having been killed by some unknown enemies-Accused, held,…
🔒
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