| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1065 2000 SLD 1065 2000 SCMR 1758 2000 SLD 1479 2000 SCMR 1758 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 1996, decision dated: 9-06-2000.
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHARY, SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH ARID HAMID ALI MIRZA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 1996, decision dated: 9-06-2000.
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHARY, SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH ARID HAMID ALI MIRZA, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SARFRAZ alias SAPPI and 2 others
VS
THE STATE
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--S. 302---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to consider the contention that witnesses produced by prosecution were related to the deceased and independent witness was not produced by the prosecution in support of its case; that Courts below while discarding the testimony of prosecution witnesses acquitted two co-accused and as such, without sufficient corroboration which was not available on record there was no justification with the Courts below to register conviction against the accused persons and that enmity between the parties existed and that being so, prosecution was required to have produced evidence of unimpeachable integrity to corroborate the eye-witness account. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302 & 304---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.17---Appraisal of evidence---Standard of Islamic Qanun-e-Shahadat---Applicability---Such standard can only be taken into consideration for proving the guilt where the accused had to be punished for the offence pertaining to Hudood or Qisas, but in the cases pertaining to Ta'zir standard of Islamic Qanun-e-Shahadat is not applied. Riaz Ahmad v. State 1998 SCMR 1729 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- ----Ss. 302 & 304---Appraisal of evidence---Discrepancies in crossexamination---Minor contradictions---Effect---If in cross-examination intrinsic value of incriminating evidence of a witness has not been shaken, statement of such witness cannot be discarded for minor contradictions. Mushtaq alias Shaman v. The State PLD 1995 SC 46 ref. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302 & 304---Appraisal of evidence---Interested witness, testimony of=--Duty of Court---Scope---Testimony of interested witness cannot be discarded per se for such reasons, but for safe administration of justice Courts are required to apply the rule of caution by seeking corroboration to the statement of an interested witness on its material parts from other admissible evidence---Unless it has been brought on record by the defence that the involvement of accused in the case is on account of ulterior motives coupled with mala fides to ensure his conviction,…
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