| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 1788 2009 SLD 1788 2009 SCMR 1133 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos.110 of 2004 and 126 of 2008, decision dated: 23rd April, 2009, hearing DATE : 14-04-2009
, JAVED IQBAL, SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY AND SAYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Appeals Nos.110 of 2004 and 126 of 2008, decision dated: 23rd April, 2009, hearing DATE : 14-04-2009
, JAVED IQBAL, SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY AND SAYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MOBASHAR AHMAD.
VS
THE STATE Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2008 MUHAMMAD SHARIF Vs THE STATE
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b),364,392
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 7
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 4
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss. 302(b), 364 & 392---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.43---Re-appraisal of evidence---Last seen evidence---Extra judicial confession---Joint trial---Statement of one accused against other---Independent witness---Both the accused along with two unknown persons were seen boarding taxi of deceased from taxi stand---Later on dead body of deceased was found on pointation of one accused who made extra judicial confession---Death sentence awarded to both the accused was maintained by High Court---Validity---Presence of prosecution witness at taxi stand where he had seen deceased last time was established in cross-examination as he used to work as auto-electrician and used to repair taxis etc.---As such the prosecution witness was independent witness bearing no relationship at all with complainant or deceased except that he knew the latter, who had given truthful and confidence inspiring narration of incident i.e. boarding of deceased's car by two accused as well as two other unknown persons and their departure---Under cross-examination nothing could be extracted from such prosecution witness except for his denial of having informed complainant regarding last seen evidence, whereas he had stated so in his statement before police, which was a minor discrepancy and could be ignored---Prosecution witness had no reason whatsoever to implicate both the accused falsely as no enmity had been remotely suggested by accused in their cross-examination---Testimony of two prosecution witnesses inspired confidence and could be relied upon---Accused, who made extra judicial confession pad fully implicated other accused in his confession before prosecution witness which was approved by Supreme Court---Where, in a joint trial, confession of one accused was proved, under Art.43 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, the same might be taken into consideration as circumstantial evidence against co-accused---Extrajudicial confession of one accused as well last seen evidence was corroborated by arrest of accused along with car belonging to deceased which was proved by prosecution through evidence of recovery…
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