Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1898

Section: A I R 1929 Lah. 768 ref.

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: S. 511 S. 75

 Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-----   ------- S. 511-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 75-Previous conviction-Can be proved by admission of fact by accused-Sentence under S. 75 may be based on such admission-[Alif Din v. The Pakistan State P L D 1960 Pesh. 6 dissented from].   It was contended that a previous conviction must, where it is required to be proved against a person, be proved strictly in accordance with clauses (a) and (b) of section 511 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, and no enhanced punishment could be imposed under section 75 of the Penal Code, 1860, merely on the admission of the accused person himself:   Held, that the methods of proof indicated in clauses (a) and (b) of section 511 are not exclusive methods of proof but they are merely in addition to the ordinary methods provided by law for the proof of a fact. Under the Evidence Act, 1872 an admission of fact is just as good a method of proof as any other. The question, however, as to whether such an admission simpliciter would or would not be sufficient to enable a Court to accept the same as being of such a probative value as to be safely relied upon, for the enhanced punishment against the accused is entirely a different question, and must necessarily depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Where in the circumstances of a case there could be no reason for the accused being misled as to the specific nature of the previous conviction, the admission made by the accused himself could be safely relied upon for imposing enhanced punishment on him under section 75 of the Penal Code, 1860.   Alif Din v. The Pakistan State P L D 1960 Pesh. 6 dissented from.   A I R 1929 Lah. 768 ref.   Emperor v. Dalip Singh A I R 1944 Lah. 25 approved.   JUDGMENT   This rule is directed against the conviction of the petitioner under section 411 read with section 75 of the Pakistan Penal Code by a Magistrate of the 1st Class, Pirojpur, who has sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year.   The appeal preferred against the aforesaid conviction has also been dismissed by thelearned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barisal.   The…