Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302

Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: 27

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)  S. 302--Murder--Witness--Evidence, divisibility of Seven co- accused acquitted by trial Court on same evidence-Conviction of accused, held, could not be sustained on sole testimony of a prosecu tion witness without corroboration from unimpeachable and independent evidence--Conviction and sentence set aside, in circum stances.--[Evidence-Witness]. Imam Bux v. The State 1079 P Cr. L J 1008 rel. (b) Evidence Act (I of 1872) S. 27--Recoveries, evidentiary value of--Alleged weapons of offence taking 6 months to reach Chemical Examiner and Chemical Examiner taking another 6 months in giving his report -- No explanation whatsoever forthcoming for such inordinate delays--Recoveries, held, of no value as evidence for corroboration of ocular testimony, in circumstances.--[Delay-Recovery]. Date of hearing: 1stJuly, 1980.                                                                                                                                                    JUDGMENT NASIR ASLAM ZAHID; J.--This appeal under section 410, Cr. P. C. filed by appellant Siddiq son of Daim calls into question his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. and sentence of imprisonment for life by the learned Sessions Judge, Badin, vide his judgment dated 23-11-78. Before the trial Court there were 8 accused but only the appellant before this Court was convicted and the remaining 7 accused, namely Soomar, Hote Khan, Muhammad, Amir Bux, Ahmed, Dossoo and Sharif were given benefit of doubt and were acquitted of the charge under section 148/366/149/302/323/324; P. P. C. 2. The incident in this, according to the prosecution, took place on 25-12-1974 at about 8 a. m. F. I. R. was lodged by Hashim son of Abdullah (P. W. 1). As various, persons were involved in the F. I. R., it would be convenient to…