Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 524 2007 SLD 524 2007 SCMR 437
Shariat Appellate Bench
Jail Petition No.8(S) of 2005, decision dated: 14-11-2006. (On appeal from the judgment, dated 29-1-2005 passed by the Federal Shariat Court, Lahore, in Jail Criminal Appeal No.224/I of 2003 and Criminal Suo Motu No.4/I of 2004)
JUSTICE, JAVED IQBAL, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICES SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN CH. IJAZ AHMED, DR. ALLAMA KHALID MEHMOOD AND ALLAMA RASHID AHMED, JULLUNDHARI, MEMBERS
F.K. Butt, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Ch. Munir Sadiq Advocate Supreme Court for the State on Court call

MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR-

VS

THE STATE

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 203-F(2B),185(3)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 129(g)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 338-F

Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979

Section: 10,11,16

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Arts. 203-F(2-B) & 185(3)---Constitutional jurisdiction of Supreme Court---Concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below---Interference by Supreme Court---Principles---Normally, Supreme Court does not interfere with findings of fact arrived at by the Courts below, while exercising constitutional jurisdiction after its satisfaction that findings of the Courts below are on the whole reasonable and are not arrived at by disregarding any provision of law or any accepted principle concerning appreciation of evidence---If finding is on the face of it against evidence or so patently improbable, or perverse that to accept it could amount to perpetuating a grave miscarriage of justice, or if there has been any misapplication of principle relating to appreciation of evidence, or finally, if finding could be demonstrated to be physically impossible, then it is the duty and obligation of Supreme Court to interfere in concurrent conclusions arrived at by the Courts below. (b) Criminal trial--- ---Delay in registration of F.I.R.---Effect---Generally delay in lodging F.I.R. cannot in all cases lead to the inference that the cases set up in F.I.R. is necessarily true or false, however it is relevant circumstance to be considered. (c) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)--- ---S. 10---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.129 (g)---Withholding of evidence---Presumption---No report of Chemical Examiner regarding swabs of victim was available, in spite of the fact that according to prosecution, the parcel was sent to Chemical Examiner---Effect---Such piece of evidence having been withheld by prosecution, therefore, adverse inference could be taken against the prosecution. Abdul Khaliq v. The State 1995 SCMR 1412 and Abdul Waheed v. The State 1995 SCMR 1498 rel. (d) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)--- ----Ss. 10, 11 & 16---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.338-F---Reappraisal of evidence---Unexplained delay in F.I.R.---Benefit of doubt---Acquittal of co-accused---Accused along with two co-accused was charged with offence of abduction and committing Zina-bil-Jabr with the…
🔒
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