| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1708 2008 SLD 1708 2008 SCMR 849 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.386 of 2006, decision dated: 6-02-2008.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 17-2-2005 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Appeal No.644 of 2003)
M. JAVED BUTTAR, ZIA PERWEZ AND SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN, JAFFERY, JJ
Asadullah Khan Chamkani, Advocate Supreme Court and Tasleem Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Abdul Samad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court/Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2.
Criminal Appeal No.386 of 2006, decision dated: 6-02-2008.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 17-2-2005 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Appeal No.644 of 2003)
M. JAVED BUTTAR, ZIA PERWEZ AND SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN, JAFFERY, JJ
Asadullah Khan Chamkani, Advocate Supreme Court and Tasleem Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Abdul Samad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court/Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2.
SAEED KHAN and 5 others
VS
THE STATE and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss. 302 & 148---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to reappraise the entire evidence for safe administration of criminal justice. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302 & 148---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185---Appraisal of evidence---F.I.R. having been promptly lodged, chance of deliberation and consultation with others to wrongly involve the accused was excluded---Details of the occurrence had been elaborately explained in the F.I.R.---Charge had been proved by ocular evidence duly supported by medical evidence---Involvement of accused was duly spelt out in the statements of prosecution witnesses along with the recoveries of pallets---Prosecution had the prerogative to produce evidence as might be necessary to prove the charge and to give up the witnesses after sufficient evidence was brought on record---No inference could be drawn about the testimony of the remaining witnesses in the absence of any positive evidence---Incident had occurred in daylight and the witnesses were natural witnesses of the occurrence---Courts below had not done any misreading, non-reading or misappraisal of evidence---Impugned did not suffer from any illegality or irregularity---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Mazhar Ali v. The State 2005 SCMR 523 and Allah Dad and another v. The State 1995 SCMR 142 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---Ss. 302 & 148---Prerogative of prosecution to produce evidence as may be necessary to prove the charge and to give up the witnesses after sufficient evidence is brought on record---No adverse inference or presumption can be drawn about the testimony of the remaining witnesses in the absence of any positive evidence---In case the defence relies on the fact that the remaining witnesses would not have supported the prosecution case, they can always be examined in defence. Mazhar Ali v. The State 2005 SCMR 523 ref. JUDGMENT ZIA PERWEZ, J.---This appeal by leave of Court is directed against the judgment of a learned Division Bench of Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dated 17-2-2005, whereby, Criminal Appeal No.644 of 2003 filed by the…
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