| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1137 2002 SLD 1137 2002 SCMR 261 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1998, decision dated: 5-10-2001. dates of hearing: 25th, 26th and 27-09-2001.(On appeal from judgment of Lahore High Court dated 21-7-1997 passed in Crl. As. Nos. 52 and 52-A of 1995)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, MUNIR A. SHEIKH AND RANA BHAGWANDAS, JJ
Mian Aftab Farrukh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Sh. Khizar Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents. Malik Ainul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court for the Sta
Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1998, decision dated: 5-10-2001. dates of hearing: 25th, 26th and 27-09-2001.(On appeal from judgment of Lahore High Court dated 21-7-1997 passed in Crl. As. Nos. 52 and 52-A of 1995)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, MUNIR A. SHEIKH AND RANA BHAGWANDAS, JJ
Mian Aftab Farrukh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Sh. Khizar Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents. Malik Ainul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court for the Sta
KHADIM HUSSAIN
VS
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SHAH and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---S. 302/34---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to the complainant to consider whether evidence on record had been properly appraised by the High Court in conformity with the well-established principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the context of the contention that in an occurrence which took place in broad daylight and was witnessed by those who were not inimically disposed towards the accused, their acquittal from the murder charge could not be justified on minor and immaterial contradictions. (b) Criminal. Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ---S. 417---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185---Appeal against acquittal---Guidelines---Appellate Court would not interfere with acquittal merely because on reappraisal of the evidence it comes to the conclusion different from that of the Court acquitting the accused, provided both the conclusions are reasonably possible---If, however, the conclusion reached by that Court was such that no reasonable person would conceivably reach the same and was impossible then Supreme Court would interfere in exceptional cases on overwhelming proof resulting in conclusive and irresistible conclusions and that too with a view only to avoid grave miscarriage of justice and for no other purpose---Important test visualised in such cases in this behalf was that the finding sought to be interfered with, after scrutiny under the foregoing searching light, should be found wholly as artificial, shocking and ridiculous. Ghulam Sikandar v. Mamraz Khan PLD 1985 SC 11; Muhammad Iqbal v. Sanaullah PLD 1997 SC 569; State v. Farman Hussain PLD 1995 SC 1; Ahmad v. Crown PLD 1951 FC 107; Abdul Majid v. Superintendent of Legal Affairs, Government of Pakistan PLD 1964 SC 426 and State v. Bashir PLD 1997 SC 408 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302/34---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185---Appeal against acquittal---Witnesses were inimically disposed towards the accused and had a motive against them for false implication---Manner of recovery of crime weapon was totally unreliable---View taken by High Court could neither be declared illegal nor…
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