Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 761 1995 SLD 761 1995 PLD 475
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.49 of 1993, decision dated: 3rd April, 1995
AJMAL MIAN, FAZAL KARIM AND MUKHTARAHMED, JUNEJO, JJ
M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate Supreme Court for the State

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S.302---Appreciation of evidence---Night time incident ---Identification-­Visual identification---Evidentiary value---Evidence of visual identification is one of the categories of "suspect evidence" and ordinarily it is not safe to convict the accused on the basis of such evidence without corroboration--­Where, however, the evidence of visual identification is of exceptionally good quality, such as, where the offender was known to the witness, there was sufficient light, the witness had an unobstructed view of the offender and there was a dialogue between the witness and the offender, the evidence may be acted upon.--[Identification]. R v. Turnbull (1976) 3 All ER 549; Scott v. The Queen (1989) AC 1242; Junior Reid v. The Queen (1990) 1 AC 363; Palmer v. The Queen.(1990) 40 WIR 282; Beckford v. The Queen (1993) 97 Cr. App. R. 409 and Freemantle v. The Queen (1994) 1 WLR 1437 ref. Per Asjmal Mian, J.; Mukhtar Ahmed Juneio, J. agreeing--- (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----5.302---Appreciation of evidence---Identification---Night time incident Visual identification---Evidentiary value---Views expressed in State v. Farman Hussain and others PLD 1995 SC 1 adhered to:--[Identificaitonj. JUDGMENT FAZAL KARIM J.--This is an appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 16-12-1991 whereby the appeal of the appellant, Muhammad Arshad, against his conviction and sentence recorded by a judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur dated 7-6-1988 was dismissed with the direction that "the appellant would have the benefit of the provisions of section 382-B, Cr.P.C." and that "whole of the fine, if realized, shall be paid to ,the heirs of the deceased as compensation". The learned Sessions Judge had by that judgment convicted the appellant under section 302 of the P.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default thereof two years' R.I. for the murder of Jamal Din. Half of the fine if realised, was directed to be. paid to the heirs of the deceased as compensation. 2. lamal Din died a violent death at 2-00 a.m. on 9-8-1986 when he was asleep at an open place near his house in Chak No.…
🔒
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