| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1974 2008 SLD 1974 2008 PLD 513 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.215 of 2007, decided on 7th April, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 23-2-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Appeals Nos.1586, 1641, 1664 and Murder Reference No.99-T/2002).
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED ZAWWAR HUSSIAN, JAFFERY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Appeal No.215 of 2007, decided on 7th April, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 23-2-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Appeals Nos.1586, 1641, 1664 and Murder Reference No.99-T/2002).
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED ZAWWAR HUSSIAN, JAFFERY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD ASGHAR
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to reappraise evidence for the purpose of ascertaining question of guilt or innocence of accused. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 342---Statement of accused---Accepting or rejecting of---Principles---Statement of accused recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C. is to be read in its entirety, is to be accepted or rejected as a whole and reliance should not be placed on that portion of the statement which goes against the accused. Shabbir Ahmad v. The State PLD 1995 SC 343 and The State v. Muhammad Hanif and 5 others 1992 SCMR 2047 rel. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.22---Reappraisal of evidence---Identification parade---Out of three accused who were convicted and sentenced by Trial Court, two were acquitted by High Court and one was sentenced to imprisonment for life---Plea raised by accused was that neither he was known to prosecution witnesses nor he was named in F.I.R. and no identification parade was conducted---Validity---As the accused was not known to prosecution witnesses by face and his name was not mentioned in F.I.R., it was all the more necessary for prosecution to hold identification parade of the accused---Prosecution was under an obligation to prove its case against accused person beyond any shadow of doubt---No evidence was available on record to connect accused with commission of crime, inasmuch as, according to prosecution witnesses, he did not fire even a single shot---Case of accused was on much better footing and position as compared to two accused who were acquitted by High Court---High Court convicted the accused on the basis of no evidence and committed grave illegality, inasmuch as, the evidence was completely misread---Prosecution totally failed to prove charge against accused and findings of High Court that prosecution had succeeded in establishing its case against the accused were erroneous and not sustainable in law---Supreme Court reversed the findings and set aside the of High Court regarding accused who was acquitted of the charge---Appeal…
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