| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 1582 2007 SLD 1582 2007 PLD 104 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.147 of 2001, decision dated: 13-09-2006
RANA BHAGWANDAS, NASIR-UL-MULK AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Mian Aftab Farrukh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Sardar M. Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant. Dil M. Tarar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Criminal Appeal No.147 of 2001, decision dated: 13-09-2006
RANA BHAGWANDAS, NASIR-UL-MULK AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Mian Aftab Farrukh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Sardar M. Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant. Dil M. Tarar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
ZAIGHAMUR-REHMAN alias ZAIGI
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 185---Jurisdiction of Supreme Court under Art. 185 of the Constitution---Scope---Substituting concurrent findings---When two Courts, after due appraisal of evidence, came to concurrent conclusion as to guilt of accused, Supreme Court is not expected to substitute such findings of fact in proceedings under Art. 185 of the Constitution. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185---Reappraisal of evidence---Mitigating circumstances---Confinement in death cell for six years---Delay in registration of F.I.R.---Sufficient cause---Sentence of death awarded by Trial Court was maintained by High Court---Plea raised by accused was that delay in registration of F.I.R. was unexplained and there were mitigating circumstances for reducing quantum of sentence, as accused had been confined in death cell for about six years---Validity---Lodging of F.I.R. could not be said to be delayed because attempt to save life of a person was rightly considered to be more important than to rush to police station particularly when real brother of deceased, who was complainant of the case, had to arrange 12 pints of blood, which must have consumed time and effort---Supreme Court did not see any mitigating circumstances as it was not a case of single injury or that the motive remained shrouded in mystery---Plea for mitigation was confinement of accused in death cell for about six years by itself did not constitute sufficient mitigating circumstances to overturn the normal penalty of death---Supreme Court declined to interfere in the conviction and sentence concurrently awarded by Trial Court and High Court---Appeal was dismissed. Mehmood Rashid and others v. The State 2003 SCMR 581; Muhammad Ahsan alias Aksan v. The State PLD 2006 SC 163; Jawed Malik v. The State 2005 SCMR 49; Iftikhar Ahrnad v. The State 2005 SCMR 272 and Syed Hamid Mukhtar Shah v. Muhammad Azarn and 2 others 2005 SCMR 427 distinguished. Muhammad Yar alias Kukoo v. The State 2004 SCMR 937; Maqbool Ahmad and others v. The State 1987 SCMR 1059; Sultan and others v. The State 1987 SCMR 1177 and State of U.P. v. Dharmendra Singh and…
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