Case Details

Citation(s)
1960 SLG 280 1960 SLD 280 1960 PLD 223
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal, Appeal No. 26 of 1959, decided on 28th March 1960.
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J., A. R. CORNELIUS, AMIRUDDIN AHMAD AND S. A. RAHMAN, JJ
Aftab Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Bashir Ahmad, Attorney for Appellants. Jamil Hussain Rizvi, Advocate-General West Pakistan, (Ghulam Mujadad, Advocate Supreme Court, with him), instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD SADIQ and another--Appellants

VS

THE STATE--Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 236 & 237­Charge under S. 201, P. P. C. that accused had disposed of murdered man's body-Disposal of body not proved-Conviction for disposing of clothes etc. of deceased, held, proper. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 201-Disposal of murdered person's clothes which he was wearing shortly before but not at time of murder-Covered by S. 201-Such clothes material residue left after crime. (c) Witness-Friend of deceased-Not disclosing to anyone for nearly 24 hours that -he had seen the murder-Not choosing to rescue deceased or show any concern for his fate-Evidence of witness not of "least value". JUDGMENT CORNELIUS, J.-In this criminal appeal by special leave there are two appellants Muhammad Saqiq aged 18 and Sher Dil aged 22, who are brothers. Muhammad Sadiq's conviction is under section 302/34, P. P. C. for participation in the murder of one Hazrat Din- along with another accused, person named Ajun who was similarly convicted but has not appealed to this Court. The conviction of Sher Dil is under section 201, P. P. C. for causing disappearance of evidence of the commission of the murder of Hazrat Din, by throwing his clothes, namely, a coat, Exh, P. 10, sweater, Exh. P. 11, muffler, Exh. P. 12, a cap, Exh. 14, and a' pair of shoes, Exh. P. 14 into a disused well, from which they were recovered at his instance on the evening following the night of the murder. Taking the case of Sher Dil first, the evidence is to the effect that when interrogated by the Police, Sher Dil said he had thrown these things into the well and he undertook to produce them and did so. At the trial, Sher Dil was questioned as to whether he had effected the recovery, and as to whether he had made any statement immediately before. He denied that he had either made a statement or had produced the articles in question. Now, the charge under section 201 was against Sher Dil and certain other persons, not in respect of the articles mentioned above, but in respect of the disposal of the dead body of the said Hazrat Din, and the trial Court rejected the evidence which had been led in support of that charge. This was the evidence of two persons who…
🔒
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