| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1510 2002 SLD 1510 2002 SCMR 1806 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 126-L. of 2002, decision dated: 9-04-2002
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for the State
Criminal Petition No. 126-L. of 2002, decision dated: 9-04-2002
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for the State
ARSHAD ALI alias ACHHU
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302---Re-appraisal of evidence---Defence version---Plea of alibi--Defence plea, if true should have been taken at the earliest possible stage--Where the plea of alibi was raised during the trial at the time of recording of evidence of the accused such plea was,' evidently an afterthought--Defence plea raised at belated stage was not accepted by the Supreme Court. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S.302---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Reappraisal of evidence---Plea of alibi made at belated stage---Failure to discuss defence evidence in passed by High Court---Effect---Trial Court awarded death sentence to the accused and the sentence was maintained by High Court---Contention of the accused was that the prosecution witness was not present at the place of occurrence as some other person was stated to have brought the dead body to hospital and that High Court failed to discuss the defence evidence in its ---Validity---Presence of the prosecution witness in the hospital had been proved by the other prosecution witnesses -and the same inspired confidence which was quite natural, therefore, the credibility of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses about their presence at the place and as such having seen the occurrence, had not been adversely affected by the fact that in the record of the hospital, name of none of them was entered as a person who had brought dead body of the deceased in the hospital---No suggestion was made in the cross-examination challenging the correctness of the statement of the prosecution witnesses that they were present at the spot and had seen the occurrence, rather from the suggestions it was made out that the incident took place in a different manner, therefore, the presence of the prosecution witnesses at the spot in said manner was not disputed even by the accused---Defence plea which the accused wanted to prove was rightly found to be not creditworthy by the High Court---Evidence of defence witnesses being not of evidentiary value, the same could not be made the basis for remand of the case on technical grounds merely because High Court did not in detail discuss the same, for…
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