Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 1567 2009 SLD 1567 2009 SCMR 120
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.227-L of 2007, decision dated: 3rd September, 2008
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, 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 JAMIL

VS

MUHAMMAD AKRAM and others

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(b)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 185(3)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Appeal against acquittal of accused by High Court---Complainant and his two sons, according to F.I.R., had seen three persons coming out of their house, who could be identified by them---Accused being servant of the complainant would have been named in the F.I.R. if he was one of the said three persons---Complainant and his son had made dishonest improvements during trial and their statements were correctly discarded by both the Courts below---Rejection of direct evidence by the lower Courts was not challenged by the counsel of the complainant and he had tried to base his case on circumstantial evidence---Case against accused being one of direct evidence, other pieces of evidence were to be used for corroboration or in support of direct evidence---When the direct evidence was disbelieved then conviction could not be safely based on corroborative or confirmatory evidence---Recovery of blood-stained "Chhuri" after one month of the occurrence from an open plot not in exclusive possession of accused, was rightly disbelieved, particularly when blood on the "Chhuri" was likely to disintegrate meanwhile---Recovery of cloth after 21 days of the incident from the shop of the complainant himself was also not believable, as it was most unlikely for the accused to come to the shop of the complainant and conceal the role of the cloth in that shop---Injuries on the hand of the accused were of no avail to the prosecution, because if the same had been received during the occurrence, prosecution witnesses must have spotted them---Accused had no motive to commit the offence---Finding of acquittal recorded in the impugned was not perverse, illogical, unconscionable and contrary to law and acts---Leave to appeal was declined to complainant accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Principle---In a case of direct evidence other pieces of evidence are used for corroboration or in support of direct evidence---When direct evidence is disbelieved, then it would not be safe to base conviction on corroborative or confirmatory evidence. JUDGMENT MUHAMMD…
🔒
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