Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 885 2002 SLD 885 2002 PCRLJ 230
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No.83 of 1994, decided on 31st October, 2001.
ZAHID KURBAN ALAVI AND MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JJ
Nooruddin Sarki for Appellant. Nemo for the State.

LIAQUAT ALI

VS

THE STATE--Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 408---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)--¬Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution witnesses had specifically stated that the pay-in-slip through which the amount of Rs.10,000 was deposited in the Bank was bearing the signatures of the accused and this version had gone unchallenged---Absence of signature of the accused on his statement recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C. was not fatal to the prosecution case as no prejudice was shown to have been caused to him by such omission---Trial Court had rightly appreciated the evidence and the impugned did not warrant any interference--¬Conviction and sentence of accused were upheld in circumstances. 2000 MLD 595; PLD 1994 Pesh. 279; 1997 PCr.LJ 539; Criminal Appeals Nos.133 and 134 of 2000 and Confirmation Case No. 14 of 2000; Mst, Sultan Zari v. State 1986 PCr.LJ 1723; Muhammad Inayat v. The State 1985 PCr.LJ 469 and Munir Ahmed v. The .State Criminal Appeal No.43 of 2000 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 342 364(2)--Absence of signature of accused on his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. and absence of certificate under S.364(2), Cr.P.C. in the handwriting of the Trial Judge is not ipso facto an illegality of such a nature as to vitiate the entire proceedings or make the proceedings from the stage of the recording of the statement of accused onward unsustainable in law, necessitating remand of the case to the Trial Court---On the contrary such omission is only an irregularity and the case is to be remanded to the Trial Court for fresh proceedings from the stage of recording of statement of the accused, if he is able to show that absence of his signature on his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. or absence of the certificate of the Trial Judge in his own hand-writing has caused any prejudice to him resulting into injustice---Where no prejudice has been caused to the accused and no miscarriage of justice is shown to have taken place, the irregularity is curable and is not fatal to the conviction and sentence. Munir Ahmed v. The State Criminal Appeal No.43 of 2000 ref. Nooruddin Sarki for Appellant. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 24th August, 2001.…
🔒
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