| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1967 SLG 5446 = 1967 SLD 5446 = 1967 PLD 167 |
Supreme Court
Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 1966 and Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 157 of 1966, decided on 11th January 1967. (On appeal from the judgment of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 26th May 1966, in Criminal Appeal No. 296 of 1965/Murder Reference No. 115 of 1965).
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., Fazle-Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Barkat Ali Saleemi and Waheeduddin, Advocates Supreme Court instructed by Ziauddin Ahmad Qureshi, Attorney for Appellants. Mufti Nazar Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 1966 and Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 157 of 1966, decided on 11th January 1967. (On appeal from the judgment of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 26th May 1966, in Criminal Appeal No. 296 of 1965/Murder Reference No. 115 of 1965).
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., Fazle-Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Barkat Ali Saleemi and Waheeduddin, Advocates Supreme Court instructed by Ziauddin Ahmad Qureshi, Attorney for Appellants. Mufti Nazar Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 1966 MUHAMMAD SHAFI, MUHAMMAD SHARIF alias JATTA, AND KARAM BUKHSH, SONS of BASSA-Appellants
VERSUS
THE STATE--Respondent AND P. S. L. A. No. 157 of 1966 MUHAMMAD SADIQ, alias BHOLA, SON of IMAM BUKHSH-Petitioner versus THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962
Section: 58(2),58(b),58(3)
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 34,149
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962)-- Art. 58 (2) (b)-High Court, acting in revision, enhancing sentence to transportation for life-Appeal lies as of right to Supreme Court. The accused had been convicted under section 302/34, P. P. C. and sentenced by the trial Court to undergo five years' rigorous imprisonment which was clearly contrary to law and when the matter came before the High Court in appeal, the learned Judges enhanced the sentence under section 302/34 to transportation for life acting in revision on the basis of a proper petition. As the latter sentence was awarded in the High Court for the first time, the convicted persons had a right of appeal to the Supreme Court under Art. 58 (2) (b), Constitution of Pakistan (1962). (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1962) Art. 58 (2) (b) & 58 (3) Appeal of some of the accused, preferred as of right, to Supreme Court, under Art. 58 (2)(b)-Petition for leave to appeal preferred by another co-accused-Petition disposed of along with the appeal. Some of the accused had a right of appeal to the Supreme Court under Art. 58 (2) (b), Constitution of Pakistan (1962), which right they had duly exercised. On behalf of another co-accused a separate petition for leave to appeal under Art. 58 (3), was instituted, which the Supreme Court disposed -of along with the appeal. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103-St. witnesses-"Ordinarily" independent witnesses to be sought verification of recoveries. Ordinarily, independent witnesses are sought for verification of recoveries, but in this case, no disinterested person who had seen the occurrence or the recoveries would come forward for the purpose. The reason was obvious. The recoveries were being made while the sensation of the terrifying occurrence had not subsided, and men were naturally fearful of becoming involved in so serious an affair. (d) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 137-Cross-examination-pupose to assist Court in bringing truth to light-Purposeless prolonged cross-examination, disapproved. The purpose of cross-examination is to assist the Court in bringing the truth to light by…