Case Details

Citation(s)
1978 SLG 186 1978 SLD 186 1978 SCMR 257
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. K 15 of 1974, decision dated: 19th March 1978.
WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, DORAB PATEL AND MUHAMMAD HALEEM, JJ
N. K. Jatoi, Advocate and M. I. Memon, Advocate on-Record for Appellant. Muhammad Hayat Junejo, Senior Advocate and A. A. Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1. Abbas H. Farooqi, Senior Advocate for
Respondent No. 2

VALI MUHAMMAD

VS

BAJOO AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

(a) Evidence Act (I of 1872)---S. 21 Confessional statement Accused stating : "While I was returning I saw deceased standing on bridge with a hatchet, he warned me not to cross bridge but I did whereupon deceased assaulted me with hatchet but it was missed. I also had hatchet with which I assaulted him it hit deceased's hands and head" Plea thus raised though of self defence yet no shred of evidence in its support but on other hand, held, supported prosecution case to extent of admission of such accused's participation in occurrence and a relevant piece of evidence in support of prosecution case Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302. [Confession] . (b) Criminal trial Appreciation of evidence Incriminating clothes containing only one spot of blood and alleged to have been washed but Chemical Analyser stating same having not been completely washed and describing it as of human origin Mashir of recovery stating ; crime weapon to be discovered from fodder room of accused's dwelling at his instance but Investigation Officer stating same to have been discovered on his own search of house Recovery of hatchet, held, not made at accused's instance and solitary blood stain on clothes of respondent hardly an incriminating piece of evidence Evidence of recovery, held further, no sufficient corroboration of ocular and other evidence against accused Penal Code IXLV of 1860), S. 302. [Evidence]. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) -- --- S. 302 [Murder case] Sentence No evidence to show how occurrence begun Evidence of motive not worthy of belief Prosecution failing to prove occurrence as a premeditated murder Possibility of sudden fight probable Accused respondent, held, entitled to lesser .lad penalty in circumstances Murder having been committed before enactment of Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972, sentence, held further, could not be one of imprisonment for life but only one for transportation for life. [Sentence]. JUDGMENT DORAB PATEL, J. Ahmad Bakheh, the nephew of the appellant, was murdered at about 4 30 p. m. on 26th October, 1971 at Faiz Wah Bridge in Khairpur District. The respondents, who are brothers, were tried with one Shamam for this murder and in support of its case, the…
🔒
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