| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3460 = 1963 SLD 3460 = 1963 PLD 357 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 660 of 1962, decided on 30th March 1963.
Presented By: Manzur Qadir, C. J.
S. A. Saeed for Appellant. Aftab Farrokh for A. A.-G. for
Respondent. Dates of hearing : 6th, 11th and 16th March 1963.
Criminal Appeal No. 660 of 1962, decided on 30th March 1963.
Presented By: Manzur Qadir, C. J.
S. A. Saeed for Appellant. Aftab Farrokh for A. A.-G. for
Respondent. Dates of hearing : 6th, 11th and 16th March 1963.
SAMUNDAR KHAN-Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 373
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---- ----S. 373-Age of woman (the subject of offence)-Estimate (in absence of other evidence) arrived at from her statement in witness-box and version of her narrative given by her at time of recovery. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----- ---S. 376-Rape-(Evidence) Prosecutrix carrying on at relevant time profession of prostitute "Very strong" evidence required to substantiate offence-Mere statement of woman that she was "raped" without any specific allegation that intercourse was without her consent-Insufficient in absence of any corroboration. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------- --S. 344---Wrongful confinement-Physical obstruction necessary, or that the person wrongfully confined would have been physically prevented if he had tried to go out. (d) Re-trial---- --- (Expediency of)-Accused tried on a number of charges (Ss. 344, 373 & 376, P. P. C. of which he wets acquitted by High Court in appeal) but not tried on others disclosed by F. I. R.-High Court refraining from giving any narrative of such charges or arriving at any findings or conclusions-Re-trial ordered on charges which had remained untriedTrial Court's duty to come to an independent conclusion-West Pakistan (Suppression of Prostitution) Ordinance (II of 1961), Ss. S, 6, 8 & 10-[The Crown v. Sultan Mahmood and 9 others P L D 1955 F C 20 dis tinguished]. (e) Bail---- --Granted by High Court at time of ordering re-trial for offences which had remained untried-High Court directing that ball could be cancelled by competent Court if it was found necessary to do so. JUDGMENT Two persons, Samundar Khan and Aziz-ur-Rahman, were tried for offences under sections 373, 376 and 344 of the Penal Code. Aziz-ur-Rahman was acquitted but Samundar Khan was convicted and sentenced on all the three charges. One of the sentences of imprisonment being five years, Samundar Khan has come up in appeal to this Court. This case relates to an allegation made by a girl, that she was subjected to prostitution against her will. According to her story, she was ten years old at the time of the…