| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1979 SLG 268 1979 SLD 268 1979 PLD 227 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 1979, decided on 19th September, 1979. Date of hearing: 19th September, 1979.
MUHAMMAD KHURSHID KHAN, J
Muhammad Shafique for Appellants. Sahibzada Akhtar Munir, Asstt. A.G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 1979, decided on 19th September, 1979. Date of hearing: 19th September, 1979.
MUHAMMAD KHURSHID KHAN, J
Muhammad Shafique for Appellants. Sahibzada Akhtar Munir, Asstt. A.G. for the State.
GHULAM RASOOL KHAN--Appellant
VS
THE STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)¬-------- ------Ss. 463 & 464-Forgery-Contention that mere entry of mutation based on false entry in Roznamcha, and for that matter preparation of a false document showing presence of donor and his admission of having made gift would not be sufficient to constitute offence of forgery due to no wrongful gain or loss having to accrue to any body until such time as mutation attested--Held, without force¬ Law does not insist on actual accrual of wrongful gain or loss-Mere intention to cause same would be sufficient to constitute offence, if mak¬ing of false document proved.--[Forgery]. Muhammad Anwar and 4 others v. The State 1971 P Cr. L J 799 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)¬------ ----S.342 and Evidence Act (I of 1872), Ss. 30 & 3-Confession made by accused in course of trial-Held, cannot be considered against co-accused under S. 30, Evidence Act, 1872.-[Confession]. On the question whether statement made under section 342, Cr. P. C. can be taken into consideration under section 30, Evidence Act, against a co-accused, there is divergence of judicial opinion. The correct view, however, appears to be that a confession made by an accused in the course of the trial cannot be taken into consideration against his co-accused under section 30 of the Evidence Act, for the reason that when a confession is made before a Court in the course of a trial, the Court perceives with its own senses the fact of the confession and knows such fact and does not believe it or consider it to be probable whereas the requirement of section 30, Evidence Act is that the Confession must be proved and under section 3 of the same Act, the fact is said to be proved when on considering the matters before it, the Court believes such fact to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought under the circumstances of the case to act upon the supposition that it exists. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)¬-------- --- Ss. 464, cl. (i), 468 & 468/109-Forgery-Abetment-Accused not mak¬ing false docerment or part of false document but merely causing same to be made-Held, not guilty of forgery-Accused, however, actively aiding and abetting…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492