| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1190 1993 SLD 1190 1993 PLD 533 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. Appeal No. 810 and C.M.R. 256 of 1989, decided on 23rd September, 1992. dates of hearing: 21st, 22nd and 23rd September, 1992
SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR, AND KHALIL-UR-REHINAN RAMDAY, JJ
Ijaz Hussain Batalvi assisted by MA. Zafar for Appellants. Maqbool Elahi Malik, A.G. for the State. Syed Ihsan Qadir Shah for the Complainant
Crl. Appeal No. 810 and C.M.R. 256 of 1989, decided on 23rd September, 1992. dates of hearing: 21st, 22nd and 23rd September, 1992
SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR, AND KHALIL-UR-REHINAN RAMDAY, JJ
Ijaz Hussain Batalvi assisted by MA. Zafar for Appellants. Maqbool Elahi Malik, A.G. for the State. Syed Ihsan Qadir Shah for the Complainant
SARDAR KHAN and 5 others --Appellants
VS
THE STATE --Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) ---- Ss. 302/149 & 148 --- Finding in a collateral matter, effect of --- Finding of a Court in a collateral matter cannot have a binding effect on another Court of equal or superior jurisdiction where such a fact was directly in issue at an independent trial.--[Sambasivan v. Public Prosecutor of Malaysia PLD 1950 PC 43 dissented from]. Sambasivaii v. Public Prosecutor of Malaysia PLD 1950 PC 43 dissented from. .. Maddad Ali's case PLD 1965 Kar. 541; Muhammad Khurshid's case PLD 1960 Lah. 1202 and PLD 1963 SC 157 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---- Ss. 302/149 & 148 --- Appreciation of evidence --- Eye-witnesses, no doubt, were interested witnesses of the occurrence but the intrinsic worth of their testimony inspired confidence which was even corroborated by the evidence of Totive, medical evidence, absconsion of two accused and the recovery of the licensed gun of the deceased at the instance of one of the accused --- F.I.R. had also been promptly lodged giving all the necessary details --- No exception could, therefore, be taken to the conviction and sentences passed against accused --- Conviction of accused under S.302/149, P.P.C. in view of the acquittal of two co-accused, however, was altered to S.302/34, P.P.C. and their conviction and sentences under S.148, P.P.C. were set aside--[Sambasivan v. Public Prosecutor of Malaysia P L D 1950 PC 43 dissented from]. Sambasivan v. Public Prosecutor of Malaysia PILD 1950 PC 43 dissented from Maddad Ali's case PLD 1965 Kar. 541; Muhammad Khurshid's case PLD 1960 Lah. 1202; PLD 1963 SC 157 and Muhammad Ali v. The State 1985 SCMR 203 ref. Muhammad Ashraf's case PLD 1977 SC 538 rel. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---- Ss. 302/149 & 148 --- Appreciation of evidence --- Accused were found innocent in the investigation and no weapon of offence had been recovered from them --- Accused were acquitted on benefit of doubt in circumstances. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---- Ss. 302/149 & 148 --- Interested witnesses, testimony of --- Demanding corroboration for relying upon the testimony of interested witnesses is not a legal command of a universal application---Real test…
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