| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1961 SLG 2194 1961 SLD 2194 = 1961 PLD 444 |
Appellate Tribunal Sindh Revenue Board, Karachi
Criminal Appeal No. 460 of 1960, decided on 2nd May 1961
Presented By:Wahiduddin and Faruqui, JJ
Tufail Ali for Appellants. Assistant Advocate- General for
Respondent. Date of hearing :13th April 1961.
Criminal Appeal No. 460 of 1960, decided on 2nd May 1961
Presented By:Wahiduddin and Faruqui, JJ
Tufail Ali for Appellants. Assistant Advocate- General for
Respondent. Date of hearing :13th April 1961.
SARDAR BUX AND ANOTHER-Appellants
VERSUS
THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)
Section: S. 8 illus. (e)
(a) Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 8 illus. (e)-Absconding of accused-Evidence as to absconding relevant. (b) Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 114 (g)-Prosecution witness given up as hostile and offered to defence to be examined by them if they liked-Defence refusing to do so-No adverse inference can be drawn against accused. Two prosecution witnesses who had resiled from their state ments made under section 164, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 had been given up as hostile on the grounds that they were related to the accused and had been tampered with and further that they were being prosecuted for a murder and were at that time in jail and the jail authorities had not produced them. The prosecution stated that the defence might examine those witnesses if they liked. The defence refused to do so. In the circumstances, it was held that no adverse inference could be drawn against the accused for their failure to examine the two prosecution witnesses in the case. (c) Criminal trial- Defence not bound to lead evidence. Failure, however, to examine witness named in F. I. R. lodged by accused himself Can be taken as circumstance, along with other factors, for discrediting defence version. (d) Witness Interested-Principle governing value of testi mony of such witness in criminal trial-Need and extent of corroboration-Mere fact that deceased was husband of one and son of the other-Not a circumstance against such witnesses in assessing value of their evidence. Niaz and Muhammad Hussain v. The State P L D 1960 S C (Pak.) 387 foil. JUDGMENT FARUQUI, J.-The appellants Sardar bux and Haqdad have been convicted under sections 302/34, P. P. C., for the murder of Phatan by the Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana and both have been sentenced to transportation for life. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated is this. The appellants Sardarbux and Haqdad are brothers. The deceased Phatan was related to them inasmuch as, the former's mother Mst. Chutti was the sister of Bako, the father of Sardarbux and Haqdad. The third accused named Attoo, .who died during the committal pro ceedings, was related to the…