| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3128 1970 SLD 3128 = 1970 PCRLJ 652 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 5-D and 6-D of 1969, decided on 14th June 1969.
Presented By: Hamoodu Rahman, C. J., Abdus attar and M. R. Khan, JJ
Shahabuddin Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. W`. Malik Attorney for the State. Nasiruddin Choudhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed A. N. M. Nasiruddin, Senior Attorney for
Respondent No. 2. Nasiruddin Choudhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed A. N. M. Nasiruddin, Senior Attorney for
Respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 14. Shahabuddin Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. W. Malik, Attorney for
Respondent No. 15: Nemo for
Respondents Nos.3; 8, 10, 11 and 13.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 5-D and 6-D of 1969, decided on 14th June 1969.
Presented By: Hamoodu Rahman, C. J., Abdus attar and M. R. Khan, JJ
Shahabuddin Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. W`. Malik Attorney for the State. Nasiruddin Choudhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed A. N. M. Nasiruddin, Senior Attorney for
Respondent No. 2. Nasiruddin Choudhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed A. N. M. Nasiruddin, Senior Attorney for
Respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 14. Shahabuddin Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. W. Malik, Attorney for
Respondent No. 15: Nemo for
Respondents Nos.3; 8, 10, 11 and 13.
WAZID MORAL alias WAZID ALI AND 13 OTHERS Appellants THE STATE AND Criminal Appeal No. 6-D of 1969 WAZID MORAL-Appellant
VERSUS
HASHIMULLAFI AND4 OTHERS-Respondents
Law:
Section:
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of East Pakistan; Dacca, dated the 22nd February 1966, in Appeals No s. 504 and 507 of 1963 (Revision No. 675 of 1963). Criminal trial ---Cross-cases arising out of same incident-Each case to be decided on basis of evidence led in that case-Such cases or appeals arising out of them disposed of by merely stating that the Court has in the other cross-case or cross-appeal taken a different view of evidence in that case-Unwarranted-Incumbent on Court to make independent assessment of evidence in each case. Where there were two criminal appeals before the High Court each arising out of cross-criminal cases based on common incident and the High Court accepted one appeal but disallowed the other by merely stating that "since the prosecution case in the other appeal was the defence case in this appeal and the prosecution case has been disbelieved, therefore, the defence case in this appeal must also fail. Held: "this can hardly be considered to be a satisfactory manner of disposing of a criminal appeal on facts. It is a well established rule that each criminal case has to be decided upon the basis of the evidence led in that case. It cannot be disposed of merely because the Court has in a cross-case or in an appeal arising out of such a cross-case taken a different view of the evidence in that case. The High Court clearly erred in adopting such an unwarranted procedure. It was incumbent upon it to make its own independent assessment of the evidence adduced in the case in hand." Behtar Ali, Attorney Supreme Court of Pakistan for Appellants (in both the Appeals): Criminal Appeal No. 5-D of 1969 Dates of hearing: 13th and 14th June 1969. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-These two appeals by special leave arise out of the same judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of East Pakistan by which two appeals against convictions recorded in two criminal cases arising out of the same incident and a revision against the acquittal of some of the accused were analogously heard and disposed of. The incident occurred on the 15th July 1962, in or near `J. L. No. 73 of Union Council No: 8 of Mitragaon…