| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1446 2002 SLD 1446 2002 SCMR 1455 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.339 of 2000, decision dated: 21st June, 2002, hearing DATE : 8-05-2002
SH. RIAZ AHMED, C.J., MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL AND MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, JJ
Ijaz Hussian Batalvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Arshad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State
Criminal Appeal No.339 of 2000, decision dated: 21st June, 2002, hearing DATE : 8-05-2002
SH. RIAZ AHMED, C.J., MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL AND MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, JJ
Ijaz Hussian Batalvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Arshad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State
IJAZ HUSSAIN
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Age of accused---Sentence, quantum of---Special pleas of minority of the accused at the time of committing offence and mental ailment of the accused---Burden of proof---Age of accused mentioned in his statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. if remained unrebutted, the presumption of correctness would be attached to the age given in the said statement which was a part of judicial record---Where two views relating to the age of accused were possible, the view in favour of the accused was normally to be accepted--Mere fact that accused was less than eighteen years of age at the time of occurrence was not sufficient to withhold the normal penalty of death under S.302(b), P.P.C. and similarly, unless it was specifically established on record that accused was suffering from mental ailment at the time of occurrence, it would not be a valid ground for lesser punishment. The special plea of minority if is taken by the accused, the burden shall be on the accused to establish his minority but in the present case the age of the accused mentioned in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. remained un rebutted as neither the prosecution nor the defence has brought any evidence on record to determine the correct age of the accused, therefore, the age available on the judicial record would not be ignorable. The age of an accused mentioned in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. if remained unrebutted, the presumption of correctness would be attached to the age given in the statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. which is a part of judicial record. Where two views relating to the age of accused were possible, the view in favour of the accused was normally to be accepted. No evidence on record appearing in rebuttal to show that accused was major, therefore, the doubt in the matter of age would be resolved in his favour and the age of accused given in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. would be accepted. Mere fact that accused was less than eighteen years of age at the time of occurrence, was not sufficient to withhold the normal penalty of death under section. 302(b), P.P.C. and similarly, unless it was specifically established on…
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