| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1958 SLG 25 1958 SLD 25 1958 PLD 313 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 1958, decided on 30th April 1958. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench Karachi, dated the 6th November 1957, in Confirmation Case No. 56 of 1957/Criminal Appeal No. 265 of 1957
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J., M. SHABABUDDIN, A. R. CORNELIUS AND S. A. REHMAN, JJ
Muhammad Ismail Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Mazharul Huq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbul Ahmad, Attorney acting on behalf of M. A. Rehman, Attorney on-Record
Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 1958, decided on 30th April 1958. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench Karachi, dated the 6th November 1957, in Confirmation Case No. 56 of 1957/Criminal Appeal No. 265 of 1957
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J., M. SHABABUDDIN, A. R. CORNELIUS AND S. A. REHMAN, JJ
Muhammad Ismail Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Mazharul Huq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbul Ahmad, Attorney acting on behalf of M. A. Rehman, Attorney on-Record
BILLMORIA alias MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN-
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Granted to consider whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient for convictions for murder and robbery---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 160. (b) Circumstantial evidence---Sufficiency for conviction--Unexplained recoveries on fourth day of murder, of property robbed and weapon of offence, at accused's pointing out. Practically everything which was robbed from the murdered man was recovered from accused Billmoria's possession on the fourth day following the discovery of the crime. Held, this was a very strong circumstance favouring the belief that he was the person who removed these things, following the murder, and the natural inference was that he was directly concerned in the murder. When it was also found that he had concealed, along with some of the deceased's goods, a weapon of the exact type with which the murder was in all probability committed, the inference became almost irresistible on the basis of a complete chain of circumstances, that he himself committed the crime. The chain of circumstances was so strong that in order to create a reasonable doubt regarding the natural conclusion that the murder was committed by Billmoria, it was necessary for him to establish exculpatory circumstances of a concrete kind, and in the absence of either proof or suggestion by him that he received the goods from another, in a manner unconnected with the murder, it was difficult to conceive of any circumstance which might have the effect of creating such a doubt, except perhaps an allegation supported by reliable proof, that at the time when the murder was committed, Billmoria was in some other place. There was no such allegation, and Billmoria led no evidence in his defence at the trial. JUDGMENT CORNELIUS, J.---This appeal against convictions for murder and robbery is brought before the Court by one Billmoria alias Muhammad Hussain, by special leave, which was granted to consider whether the evidence on record is sufficient to warrant his convictions. These convictions are based upon circumstantial evidence, and the question before the Court now is whether having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the facts…
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