Case Details

Citation(s)
1985 SLG 590 1985 SLD 590 1985 SCMR 821
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.5-K of 1984, decision dated: 24-01-1985.(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 21-12-1983 passed in Criminal Appeal No.44 of 1983 and Confirmation Case No.5 of 1983 of the High Court of Sind, Karachi)
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, 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

ABDUL RAHMAN

VS

ALI HASSAN and others

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---Art. 185(3)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302--Ocular evidence furnished by only two witnesses out of three not only interested but was also adversely affected by medical evidence--Circumstantial evidence of recoveries of crime weapons and blood-stained clothes was impeach­able--Motive attributed to accused not proved--Petition for leave to appeal dismissed. ORDER MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--The petitioner herein seeks leave to appeal against the acquittal of Ali Hassan, Zahoor Hussain, Shabbir Hussain and Lal Din, who were tried for the murder of Nazir Ahmad on 21st of September, 1981 at 7.30 a.m. near a Primary School situate in Deh 23-Jamrao, Taluka Sinjhoro, District Sanghar. The deceased suffered as many as 13 incised and 2Ik fire-arm injuries. The former were allegedly caused by respondents Zahoor Hussain, Shabbir Hussain and Lal Din, who were armed with hatchets, while the latter by Ali Hassan by his licensed gun which was found to contain a crime empty in its chamber on being secured on 22nd of September, 1981. Respondents Zahoor Hussain and Shabbir Hussain each produced blood-stained hatchets and clothes. The cause imputed for the murder was litigation between the parties over a piece of agricultural land since about a year prior to the event. The trial Court while convicting the respondents accepted the ocular testimony and the recovery of the incriminating articles at the behest of Zahoor Hussain and Shabbir Hussain. In giving out its assessment as to the credibility of the witnesses, the trial Court held that they were "natural, truthful and trustworthy witnesses" and as a matter of law it was not necessary that there should be an independent corroboration before giving weight to their evidence. However, if any support was needed it was provided by the incriminating articles recovered at their behest. This conclusion was reached in the context of the submission that Abdur Rehman was an interested witness as he was the father-in-law of the deceased while Muhammad Ramzan who though not related was yet inimical as respondent Ali Hassan had instituted a criminal case against him and his brother for causing injuries in the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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