| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1985 SLG 574 1985 SLD 574 1985 SCMR 721 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 33 and 34 of 1981, decision dated: 26-01-1985.(On appeal from the Judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Circuit, dated 11-5-1980 in Cr.A. No.1079/BWP, M.R. No.14 of 1979/BWP)
NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA AND M.S.H. QURAISHI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Appeals Nos. 33 and 34 of 1981, decision dated: 26-01-1985.(On appeal from the Judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Circuit, dated 11-5-1980 in Cr.A. No.1079/BWP, M.R. No.14 of 1979/BWP)
NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA AND M.S.H. QURAISHI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
KHADIM HUSSAIN
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---Art.185(3)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34--Leave to appeal granted to convicts on their separate petitions from jail to examine, inter alia, whether question of their identification by eye-witnesses in moonlight was not doubtful, which impression got further strengthened by a marked conflict between ocular evidence and medical evidence.- (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---5.302/34--Evidence Act (I of 1872), S.9--Identification parade--Value of--The mere fact that a witness is able to pick out an accused person from amongst a crowd does not prove that he has identified that accused person as having taken part in the crime which is being investigated. It merely mean that the witness happens to know that accused person. The principal evidence of identification is the evidence of a witness given in a Court as to how and under what circumstances he came to pick out a particular accused person and the details of the part which that accused took in the crime in question. The statement made by such a witness at an identification parade might be used to corroborate his evidence given in Court, but otherwise the evidence of identification furnished by an identification parade can only be hearsay except as to the simple fact that a witness was in a position to show that he knew a certain accused person by sight. Lal Singh v. Crown 51 ILR (Lah). 396 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-- ---S.302/34--Evidence Act (I of 1872), S.9--Identification parade--Not clear from entire evidence relating to identification parade whether persons named were identified by their role in crime or as individuals, as friends or as foes--Held, if it was identification of their role then it should have been specific so as to complete the picture of crime and re-inforce case against them for commission of crime. JUDGMENT SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Leave to appeal was granted to the two convicts under section 302/34, P.P.C. on their separate petitions from jail to examine, inter alia, whether the question of their identification by eye-witnesses in moonlight was not doubtful, which impression got further strengthened by a marked conflict between the ocular evidence…
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