| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 935 1989 SLD 935 1989 PLD 492 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 18/K and 19/K of 1985, decision dated:18-03-1989.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.,SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ZAFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, SAAD SAOOD, JAN AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
Rashida Patel, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 18/K of 1985).Rustam Kaikobad, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 19/K of 1985).A.H.Lakho Advocate General (Sind) and Muzaffar Hasan, Advocate-on-Record
Criminal Appeals Nos. 18/K and 19/K of 1985, decision dated:18-03-1989.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.,SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ZAFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, SAAD SAOOD, JAN AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
Rashida Patel, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 18/K of 1985).Rustam Kaikobad, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 19/K of 1985).A.H.Lakho Advocate General (Sind) and Muzaffar Hasan, Advocate-on-Record
Mst. ASGHARI and anothervsTHE STATE(Appeals from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind at Karachi, in Conf. Case No.8 and Criminal Appeals Nos.87, 87A, 88 and 89 of 1983)
Law:
Section:
(a) Qanun-e-Shahdat (10 of 1984)-----Art. 37--Confession--Retracted--Retracted confession recorded in presence of other accused persons not admissible in evidence. (b) Penal Code (RLV of 1860)-- ---S. 302/34--Appraisal of evidence--Disappearance of a person-�Prosecution case was that accused persons killed the person (who had disappeared) and buried him in their house--Prosecution failed to prove that person who disappeared was murdered at all; that accused person's concealed his body as alleged and that accused persons knew that the body was concealed in the courtyard of their house--No circumstantial or direct evidence was available to connect accused with disappearance of the said person or concealment of the body and other articles found in the courtyard of their house--Contradiction in the depositions on vital matters made testimony of the witnesses unreliable and the recovery of articles highly doubtful--Prosecution failed to prove any motive on the part of accused persons to commit murder--Circumstances stated amply explained the inability of accused persons to lodge report about disappearance of the deceased-�Prosecution having failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the accused were acquitted. JUDGMENT NAIMUDDIN, J.--This judgment will dispose of both the afore�mentioned Criminal Appeals as these are directed against the single judgment of the Sind High Court. Appellants Muhammad Shafique and Mst. Asghari, her son Muhammad Raees and her daughter Mst. Parveen were tried for offences under sections 302 read with sections 34, P.P.C. and 201 read with section 34, P.P.C. for committing the murder of Muhammad Ismail, by the Sessions Judge, Tharparkar at Mirpurkhas who by judgment dated 30-6-1983 convicted Muhammad Shafique and Mst. Asghari under sections 302 read with section 34, P.P.C. and sentenced them to death. He also convicted Muhammad Raees and Mst. Parveen under the same sections and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. He also convicted all the four accused under section 201 read with section 34, P.P.C. and sentenced each of them to suffer R.I. for 7 years, and also directed that Muhammad Shafique and Mst. Asghari will undergo…
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