| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1888 2008 SLD 1888 2008 SCMR 1565 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.488-L of 2006, decision dated: 8-07-2008
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Munir, Ahmed Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Abdul Sadiq Ch. Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.1 to 4. Ms. Yasmin Saigol, Deputy Prosecutor-General for
Respondent No. 5
Criminal Petition No.488-L of 2006, decision dated: 8-07-2008
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Munir, Ahmed Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Abdul Sadiq Ch. Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.1 to 4. Ms. Yasmin Saigol, Deputy Prosecutor-General for
Respondent No. 5
Haji INAYAT ALI
VS
SHAHZADA and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss. 302/324/337-A(ii)/34---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Members of the accused party according to medical evidence had received injuries on the vital parts of their bodies---Father of the main accused had received fire-arm injuries while his two brothers had received injuries on their heads and the same had been suppressed by the complainant party---Was quite natural for the said accused being the son and brother of the rest of the accused to try to save their lives, who had fired only two shots from his .12 bore single barrel gun and thereafter he had neither reloaded his gun nor caused any third fire---Complainant party which felt annoyed over the behaviour of the accused had gone to the door step of their house to launch a protest---Accused had taken the plea of self-defence at the first instance, which was supported by the circumstances of the case and was closer to the truth---Reasons advanced by High Court for acquitting the accused being neither whimsical nor perverse, did not call for interference---Leave to appeal was refused to complainant in circumstances. Ashiq Hussain alias Muhammad Ashraf v. The State PLD 1994 SC 879 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302/324/337-A(ii)/34---Appreciation of evidence---Guidelines---Defence plea---Practice and procedure---All the factors favouring belief in the accusation must be placed in juxtaposition to the corresponding factors favouring the plea in defence and the total effect should be estimated in relation to the question, viz. is the plea/version raised by the accused satisfactorily established by the evidence and circumstances appearing in the case---If the answer be in the affirmative, then the Court must accept the plea of the accused and act accordingly---If the answer to the question be in the negative, then the Court will not reject the defence plea as being false, but will go a step further to find out whether or not there is yet a reasonable possibility of defence plea/version being true---If the Court finds that although the accused has failed to establish his plea to the satisfaction of the Court yet his plea might reasonably be true, evenβ¦
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