Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 105, 106

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302

(a) Evidence Act (I of 1872) Ss. 105 & 106-Burden of proof-Onus entirely lies on prosecution to prove its case against accused-Prosecution must stand on its own strength and cannot seek support from any weakness of defence.-[Burden of proof]. Major Robert Stuart Wauehtipe V., Emperor A I R 1933 Cal. 800; Woolmington v. Director of Public Prosecutions 1935 A C 462; Ram Kala v. Emperor A I R 1946 All. 191 and Muhammad Yaqoob v. The Crown PLD 1954 B J 9 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302-Murder-Evidence, appreciation of-Testimony of sole eye-witness not confidence inspiring-Fact that accused took up a false plea or adduced false evidence, held, could not by itself be made a basis of conviction-Conviction and sentence set aside, in circumstances.-[Evidence].       Date of hearing 22ndApril, 1980.                                                                                                             JUDGMENT This is an appeal preferred by Naurans from his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. and sentence of life imprisonment plus a fine of Rs. 2,000 or in default of payment thereof, rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year. Half of the amount of fine, if realized, was ordered to be paid to the heirs of the deceased. Six of the co-accused tried in the same case were acquitted on the benefit of doubt. 2. The case of the prosecution was that deceased Khan Muhammad accompanied by Dulla complainant and Falaksher P. W. had been returning at about noon on 11-7-1975 from the bhaini of Rajab Ali where they had gone to purchase a buffalo and that when they were passing by the bhaini Muhammad Yar alias Mahmoon, co-accused, they were invited to smoke huqqa whereupon they entered the courtyard of that bhaini. Soon thereafter, Naurang appellant, Machhia, Lakhmir, Noora and Gulsher armed with sotas and Gama empty handed came and raising a lalkara started…