| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 891 2002 SLD 891 2002 PCRLJ 264 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1994, decided on 19th October, 2000.
NASIRUL MULK AND IJAZ-UL-HASSAN, JJ
Muhammad Ayub Khan, A.A.-G. for the State. M.M. Idris for the Complainant. Muhammad Ayoob Khan Tanoli for
Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1994, decided on 19th October, 2000.
NASIRUL MULK AND IJAZ-UL-HASSAN, JJ
Muhammad Ayub Khan, A.A.-G. for the State. M.M. Idris for the Complainant. Muhammad Ayoob Khan Tanoli for
Respondents.
STATE through AdvocatEGeneral N.W.F.P., Peshawar
VS
MUMTAZ alias TAJ MUHAMMAD
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302/148/149---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(1)--¬Appeal against acquittal- --Statement of the deceased made before his death, eye-witness account of incident, medical evidence, evidence on the point of motive and the evidence regarding recoveries, all were discrepant and replete with serious infirmities and contradictions and were not sufficient to bring home guilt to the accused---Prosecution having not disclosed the factum of cross-case did not appear to have come to the Court with .clean hands---Deceased before his death, in view of medical evidence, did not seem to be in his senses at the crucial time to make a statement---Ocular testimony did not inspire confidence---No independent and impartial witnesses had been examined by the prosecution and the deposition made by the close relatives of the deceased had been rightly ignored by the Trial Court in the absence of independent corroboration---Appeal against acquittal of accused was dismissed in circumstances. Ashiq Hussain v. The State 1993 SCMR 417 and Hakam Ali and others v. The State 1971 SCMR 432 ref. (b) Criminal trial--- ---- Burden of proof---Burden of proving its case rests entirely on the prosecution---Prosecution is duty-bound to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and this duty does not change or vary in the case in which no defence plea is taken by the accused---Defence plea is always to be considered in juxtaposition with prosecution case and in the final analysis if the defence plea is proved or accepted then the prosecution case would stand discredited---If the defence plea is substantiated to the extent of creating doubt in the credibility of the prosecution case, then it would be enough for acquittal---If the defence plea is not established at all, no benefit would accrue to the prosecution on that account and its duty to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt would remain in tact. Ashiq Hussain v. The State 1993 SCMR 417 and Hakam Ali and others v. The State 1971 SCMR 432 ref. Muhammad Ayub Khan, A.A.-G. for the State. M.M. Idris for the Complainant. Muhammad Ayoob Khan Tanoli for Respondents. Date of hearing: 19th…
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