Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 1865 2008 SLD 1865 2008 SCMR 1480
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos.98 and 99 of 2000, decision dated: 21st January, 2004.(On appeal from the judgment dated 4-10-1999 in Criminal Appeals Nos.32 and 70 of 1997 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi)
MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, HAMID ALI MIRZA AND FALAK SHER, JJ
M. Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 2000 and for
Respondent No. 1 in Criminal Appeal No. 99 of 2000). Raja M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz Muha

KHAN NAVEED and anotheR

VS

THE STATE and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.S. 308---Appraisal of evidence---No ocular testimony was available in the case---Evidence of the deceased having been last-seen in the company of the accused on the roof of the house of deceased was corroborated by other evidence on record including the medical evidence and the recovery of the gun at the instance of accused which had matched with crime-empties recovered from the field from which the dead body of the deceased was recovered---Prosecution witnesses had no animus for false implication of accused in the crime---Accused being the only single person held liable for the murder, his mistaken identity or substitution in place of the real culprit was out of question---Prosecution .evidence was reliable and confidence inspiring---Both the Courts below, after proper appreciation and scrutiny of evidence, had reached the conclusion that the accused was minor at the time of commission of offence, but he had attained sufficient maturity, which finding in the circumstances was not to be disturbed by the Supreme Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction---Conviction of accused under S.308, P.P.C. being legal and proper was upheld---However, sentence of seven years' R.I. awarded to accused was inadequate keeping in view the murder of a young person of sixteen years of age in a callous and cruel manner and the same was enhanced to fourteen years' R.I. as Ta'zir---Appeal was disposed of accordingly. (b) Precedents--- ----Utility---Cases already decided can hardly be of any assistance on account of the diverse nature and distinguishable features of each case and in such a situation rules or principles of general application cannot be laid down. JUDGMENT HAMID ALI MIRZA, J.--- These two Appeals Nos.98 of 2000 (Khan Naveed v. The State) and 99 of 2000 (Munawar Hussain v. Khan Naveed and another) with leave of this Court when former is filed by the appellant/convict/accused against his conviction while the latter has been filed by appellant/complainant Munawar Hussain for enhancement of sentence against the judgment, dated 4-10-1999 in Criminal Appeal No.32 of 1997 passed by learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi…
🔒
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