Case Details

Citation(s)
1961 SLG 2359 1961 SLD 2359 = 1961 PLD 936
Lahore High Court
  Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 1961, decided on 25th August 1961.  
Presented By: Shabir Ahmad, Ortcheson and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
  Sh. Shaukat Ali for Appellants.   Islam-ul-Haq for A. G. for
Respondents.   Dates of hearing: (before- D. B.): 1st, 2nd, 6th and 30th June, 1961. Before Shabir Ahmad, J.: 31st July 1961.  

  MUHAMMAD KHAN AND OIHERS----Appellants  

VERSUS

  THE STATE-----Respondent

Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: S. 32.

(a) Dying declaration-Large number (10) of culprits named Delay (24 hours after incident) Declaration not necessarily unreliable-Weight to be attached depends upon circumstances of each case-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 32.   [On difference of views between Ortcheson, J. and Yaqub Ali, J.) (Opinion of Shabir Amad, J. agreeing with Yaqub All, J.)]   What weight should be attached to a particular dying declara tion must necessarily depends on the circumstances of the case.   If the person who made a dying declaration was of unques tionable integrity the fact that the number (10) of persons mentioned as culprits by him in his dying declaration was large would not by itself suffice as a ground for rejecting it.   The dictum that if a dying declaration is recorded with delay it must be rejected, cannot be accepted.   At the same time if a dying declaration is recorded with unexplained delay, it should not generally be considered reliable.   It was held in this case that the lapse of 24 hours after the incident did not mean that the dying declaration suffered from the defect that it was recorded with unnecessary delay.   Khurshid Hussain Salihon Shah and others v. Emperor A I R 1941 Lah. 368. Considered. Also see.   Contrary view of Ortcheson, J.   Dying declaration-Recorded "24 hours" after incident and "one hour" before death, by "man of 65," having suffered gunshot wounds which had "pierced liver and peritoneum", declarant being in "condition of severe shock" and "pulse so weak that it could not be counted"-Naming ten out of seventeen mentioned in F. I. R. Held: there was no ground for doubting correctness of declaration (Per Shabir Ahmad, J., agreeing with Yaqub Ali, J, Ortcheson, J. contra)-Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 32:   Witness -- Close relative of accused naming them in murder trial-Witness not taken to have named accused falsely.   Dying declaration-Used as corroboration of statements of eye-witnesses-Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 32.   Criminal trial- Conviction- Punishment-Administrative or law and order considerations-Irrelevant in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register