| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1984 SLG 598 1984 SLD 598 1984 SCMR 646 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 77 and 78 of 1982, decision dated:8t); April, 1984 (On appeal from the judgments of LahoreHigh Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 14-3-1982 in CriminalRevision Nos. 459 and 460 of 1980)
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, M. S. H. QURAISHI AND MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, JJ
Criminal Appeals Nos. 77 and 78 of 1982, decision dated:8t); April, 1984 (On appeal from the judgments of LahoreHigh Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 14-3-1982 in CriminalRevision Nos. 459 and 460 of 1980)
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C.J., MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, M. S. H. QURAISHI AND MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, JJ
Mst: FARAH NAZ AND another--AppellantsVs.THE STATE AND others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- Art. 185 (3)-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Leave to appeal granted to see whether correct principles of criminal justice were followed in rendering verdict of guilty against accused. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- -- Art. 185 (3)-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Award of sentence of life imprisonment to accused-Leave to appeal granted to deceased's brother to examine whether normal penalty of death under S. 302, P. P. C. should not have been awarded in case.-[Sentence]. Minority View-[Per Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J Muhammad Haleem, C. J., Shafiur Rehman, M. S. H. Quraishi and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ. (contra)] (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- -- Ss. 302, 304, Part 1, 300, Exceptions 1, 2 & 4-Murder-MotiveAppreciation of evidence-Girl of tender age killing her fiance alleged to be on ground that she hated deceased and thus in order to get rid of him planned to kill him-Eye-witnesses natural and independent-Courts below scrutinizing in detail such witnesses and holding them to be reliable-Some adverse possibilities deducible from medical opinion could not shake credibility of such witnesses All attending circumstances supporting witnesses in so far as act of firing three out of 4 alleged shots by accused at deceased was concerned-Held, all that would not, by itself be enough, to reach a conclusion that only explanation for act was the one alleged by prosecution namely, that , accused hated deceased and thus in order to get rid of him planned, to kill her fiance regarding which there was no evidence-Accused guilty of offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under S. 304, Part I, P. P. C. and could be extended benefit either or more of Exceptions 1, 2 & 4 to S. 300, P. P. C. in circumstances Sentence of life imprisonment reduced to imprisonment already undergone.-[Sentence]. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- ----Ss. 302, 300, Exceptions 1, 2 & 4 and 304, Part I-Murder-Appreciation of evidence-Four shots alleged to have been fired by accused Firing of first shot not witnessed by any of eye-witnesses-Held, since it was not known as to what preceded first shot, accused therefore, entitled to…
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