| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1987 SLG 358 1987 SLD 358 1987 SCMR 435 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.475 of 1985 and Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.13 of 1986, decision dated: 12-01-1987
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J, MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND, JAVID IQBAL, JJ
Nemat Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondent
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.475 of 1985 and Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.13 of 1986, decision dated: 12-01-1987
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J, MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND, JAVID IQBAL, JJ
Nemat Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondent
DILBAZ KHAN and another
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)-Petition for leave to appeal barred by time-No justification made out for condo nation of delay--Petition dismissed. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-- ---S. 302--Several accused acquitted on extension of benefit of doubt while remaining accused convicted--Witnesses produced not direct witnesses of conspiracy--Acquittal of accused, held, would not discredit such witnesses they being not direct witnesses of conspiracy--Acquittal of accused on benefit of doubt would not necessarily mean that witnesses in that behalf purgered themselves.--[Witness]. Sher Hassan v. The State P L D 1959 S C Pak. 480: Mushtaq Ahmad and others v. The State 1985 S C M R 423; Mukhtar Hussain and another v. The State 1985 S C M R 479 and Muhammad Din v. The State 1985 S C M R 625 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-- ---S. 302--Recovery--Court not disbelieving recovery witnesses but recoveries were held to be of no consequence in so far as culpability of accused was concerned--Such assessment of Court right or wrong. held, would not mean that recovery was disbelieved and recovery witness purgered himself on point of recovery. -[Recovery] (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- ---S. 302--Appreciation of evidence--Interested witness--Merely because the witness had helped injured person after occurrence, would not mean that such person was an interested witness.--[Witness]. ORDER MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought in these two petitions from judgment, dated 16-11-1985 of the Lahore High Court; whereby a Criminal Appeal arising out of a murder case was partly allowed. Criminal Petition No. 475 of 1985 has been filed by the two convicts, Dilbaz Khan and Pervaiz Khan, who have challenged their conviction, while Criminal Petition No.13 of 1986 has been filed by Muhammad Sher complainant, seeking the reversal of the acquittal of two accused, namely, Muhammad Bashir and Muhammad Matah Khan. Criminal Petition No.13 of 1986 against acquittal is barred by time. No justification has been made out for condo nation of delay. We accordingly dismiss the same. The case against the two petitioners in the other petition is that they while armed…
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