Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302 , 324

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302 & 324---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of eye-witnesses at the scene of occurrence was natural---Eye-witnesses were independent and disinterested who had fully implicated accused---Complainant testified the circumstances leading to the incident and identified accused---Presence of injury on the person of injured eye-witness left no room of doubt that the incident did take place in the manner as described by him---Eye-witnesses had no reason to have screened the real culprit and involve accused falsely with whom they had no enmity---Evidence of recovery of crime weapon was, however, not convincing and motive was shrouded in mystery---Medical evidence had proved that accused had ,reason to believe that death was likely to be caused by the blow which he gave to deceased---Conviction and sentence of accused were consequently maintained with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Mamoon and another v. The State P L D 1962 Kar. 800; Zaab Din and another v. The State, P L D 1986 Pesh. 881; Dost Muhammad v. The State P L D 1982 Kar. 1000; Muhammad Afzal v. The State 1983 S C M R 1 and Naeemullah Hashmi v. The State 1987 M L D 1966 ref. Muhammad Daud Baloch for Appellant. Zawar Hussain Jafferi, A.-A.G. for the State. Date of hearing: 8th March, 1990. JUDGMENT Appellant Waheed alias Siraj was tried by Mr. Kadir Bakhsh Umrani, IInd Additional Sessions judge, Sukkur, for the offence under sections 302, 307, P.P.C., who found him guilty for the offence under section 302/324, P.P.C., and vide judgment dated 29-11-19'79, sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.2,000 or in default to suffer R.I. for six months. Rs.1,000, out of fine, if recovered were to be paid to legal heirs of deceased Muhammad Haneef as compensation. The appellant was also convicted under section 324, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. By this jail appeal the appellant has questioned his conviction and sentence. A separate appeal under section 410, Cr.P.C. was also filed against the said judgment through his Advocate. A separate case under section 13-E of the Arms…