Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑6 of 1970, decided on 17th August 1970.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 15th December 1968, in Criminal Appeal No. J‑186‑187 of 1968).
Constitution of Pakistan (1962),
Art. 58(3)‑Criminal case -Appreciation of evidence‑Courts below applying their mind to entire material and making no departure from any established rule in appraising evidence‑No case made out for re‑examination of evidence‑Interference in special jurisdiction, held, not warranted.
Azizullah Shaikh, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Ibrahim Memon, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for the State.
Date of hearing : 17th August 1970.
The petitioner stands convicted under sections 325, 365 and 376, P. P. C. and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, The High Court having upheld the convictions directed that the sentences should run concurrently.
Leave to appeal is asked for on grounds which go to mere appreciation of evidence. As pointed out by the learned Judge in the High Court apart from the direct testimony of Mst. Sardari who was forcibly abducted from the house of her parents and Mst. Nur Khatoon and Nur Mohammad, P. Ws., who were, along with Gulsher, deceased, caused injuries, the petitioner's conviction is supported by more than one circumstance : (i) Mst. Sardari was recovered from his custody in a forest two days after she had been abducted ; (ii) the loin cloth of the petitioner and the shalwar of Mst. Sardari were found stained with semen ; and (iii) Mst. Sardari, aged 17, was, according to the Medical evidence, subjected to sexual intercourse.
The petitioner did not deny the recovery of Mst. Sardari as alleged by the prosecution as well as the presence of semen on his loin cloth and the shalwar of Mst. Sardari. He, however, pleaded that Mst. Sardari was his lawfully wedded wife. Oral evidence was led in support of the plea which was disbelieved by the Courts below for cogent reasons.
The learned counsel has been unable to make out any reason for dais Court to re-examine evidence in the case. The Court below have applied their minds to the entire material brought on the record and made no departure from any established rule in appraising the evidence to warrant interference in our special jurisdiction.
The petition is dismissed.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer