Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b),302,374,34,161,342,120B,114,340,2 99,300,301,303,304,305,306,307,308,309,3 10,311,312,313,314,315,316,317,318,319,3 20,321,322,323,324,325,326,327,328,329,3 30,331,332,333,334,335,336,337,338,382B

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Appreciation of evidence---Interested witness---Mere relationship of an eye-witness .with the deceased or his enmity with the accused by itself does not furnish a valid basis to reject his testimony---Rule of prudence, however, requires proper scrutiny of the testimony of such a witness and its corroboration before it is accepted. Niaz v. State PLD 1960 SC 387; Sahib Masih and others v. The State 1982 SCMR 178; Ziaullah v. The State 1993 SCMR 155; Mubarak v. The State 1982 SCMR 531; PLD 1996 SC 138; Gul Khan v. The State 1999 SCMR 304 and Sharafat Ali v. The State 1999 SCMR 329 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Evidence---Burden of proof---Failure of the accused to establish his defence plea never means that the prosecution case was proved---Prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt on the strength of its own evidence. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(a) & 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Eye-witnesses including the complainant although were closely related to the deceased and on inimical terms with the accused, yet they had given confidence inspiring evidence at the trial and their testimony, besides being inherently credible was corroborated by medical evidence as regards the time of occurrence and the weapon used in the commission of offence, the recovery of the pistol at the instance of the accused which matched with the empties secured from the place of incident and the motive which also stood proved---Accused, thus, had committed Qatl-i-Amd of the deceased but not Qatl-i-Amd liable to Qisas as exercise of Tazkiyat-ul-­Shahood was not undertaken by Trial Court and it had not adverted to such aspect while recording or accepting the testimony of eye-witnesses---Conviction of accused under S.302(a), P.P.C: was consequently altered to S.302(b), P.P.C.---Motive for the occurrence, however, was ambiguous and shrouded in mystery and the accused was 20 years old at the time of commission of offence---Accused was sentenced to imprisonment for life as Tazir in circumstances. Niaz v. State PLD 1960 SC 387; Sahib Masih and others v. The State 1982 SCMR 178; Ziaullah v. The…

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