Case Details

Citation(s)
2000 SLG 354 2000 SLD 354 2000 PLD 128
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 121 of -1998(Hyderabad), decided on 13th November, 1999. DATE of hearing: 21st May, 1999
WAHID BUX BROHI, J
Madad Ali Shah for Appellant. Anwar Ansari for the State

MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM

VS

THE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Appreciation of evidence---Evidence of one of the prosecution witnesses read with F.I.R. and medical evidence had demonstrated a very uncertain situation---Complainant in his evidence recorded at the trial had altered complexion of prosecution story as given in F.I.R. by making a number of improvements and version given by other prosecution witness did not deserve any credit---Medical evidence did not support case of prosecution---No material corroboration was rendered to evidence of eye­witnesses whose testimonies even otherwise lacked credence---Magistrate who recorded confessional statement of accused, had admitted that after recording confession he sent the accused to judicial custody through same police official who had brought accused to him for confession---Act of handing over accused to same police official had detracted from sanctity of judicial confession as voluntariness of judicial confession which was essential prerequisite had become doubtful---Seizure memo of hatchet allegedly used in occurrence did not mention that same was stained with blood which was necessary when medical evidence had come in conflict with ocular evidence as to the nature of weapon used while causing injury---Prosecution had, thus, failed to prove motive---Accused was acquitted of the charge giving him benefit of doubt as' prosecution failed to prove the case against him. Abdul Hakeem and another v. The State PLD 1982 Kar. 975 and Ramzan alias Jani v. The State 1997 SCMR 590 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Appreciation of evidence---Motive---Proof---Absence of evidence on point of motive, though by itself would not damage prosecution case, but- once motive was set up it was to be proved by prosecution beyond doubt and though no hard and fast rule was laid down to prove motive, but failure to furnish cogent and reliable evidence could lead to adverse inference against prosecution. Muhammad Khan and others v. Zakir Hussain and others PLD 1995 SC 590 and Waris Ali alias Dulli and others v. The State 1999 SCMR 1469 ref. JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 30th September, 1998 passed by the…
🔒
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