| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 150 1983 SLD 150 1983 SCMR 46 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 253 of 1977, decision dated: 14-09-1981.hearing DATE : 28-06-1981.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Sind High Court dated 28 1 1977 in Confirmation Case No. 16 of 1975 and Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1975)
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, NASIM HASAN SHAH AND SHAFI UR REHMAN, JJ
Sadiq Muhammad Warraich; Advocate for Appellants. Saeed A. Shaikh, A. G. (Sind), w1. Bilal, Advocate and S.M. Abbas, Advocate on-Record (absent) for the State
Criminal Appeal No. 253 of 1977, decision dated: 14-09-1981.hearing DATE : 28-06-1981.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Sind High Court dated 28 1 1977 in Confirmation Case No. 16 of 1975 and Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1975)
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, NASIM HASAN SHAH AND SHAFI UR REHMAN, JJ
Sadiq Muhammad Warraich; Advocate for Appellants. Saeed A. Shaikh, A. G. (Sind), w1. Bilal, Advocate and S.M. Abbas, Advocate on-Record (absent) for the State
BAKHTIAR AND Another
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---Art. 185(3) Leave to appeal granted to reappraise evidence to see whether principles of criminal justice followed by Courts below.¬[Criminal trial]. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) - Ss. 302, 307, 436 & 395 read with Ss. 148 & 149 Murder¬Appreciation of evidence Trial Court acquitting three out of six accused by giving them benefit of doubt High Court on appeal giving benefit of doubt to one more accused Conviction of two accused confirmed Eye witnesses claiming to have identified all accused in light of fire raging all around house in question Contention as to identifica¬tion of accused being not possible in circumstances of case Without merit Eye witness's claim to have seen occurrence by concealing them¬selves at a place which accused did not see Nothing impossible about such claim High Court extending maximum benefit of all principles of criminal justice to accused party High Court applying rule of corroboration because of possible adverse interest of eye witnesses and after finding strong corroboration maintaining conviction of two and acquitting one Evidence about recoveries Rightly believed ¬Contention that guns belonged to other persons and not accused¬ other persons incidentally being also such from whom appellants could have taken such guns, contention without force Benefit of doubt having been extended to acquitted accused, appellants' claim to extension of such benefit to them not sustainable Nothing improbable, held, for two appellants to have joined together in crime in circum¬stances of case. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J. This jail appeal through special leave calls in question judgment dated 28 1 1977 of the Sind High Court whereby in a case of multiple murder and other offences, while allowing the appeal of one of the convicts, namely, Mastoo, the appellants' appeal from conviction and sentence of death for ten murders was dismissed. Leave to A appeal was granted for reappraisal of the evidence in order to see whether the principles of criminal justice were followed by the learned Courts below. Three accused, who were convicted by, the learned trial Court, namely, Allan, Bakhtiar (the two…
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