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.
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 449 of 1975, decided on 9th March, 1976.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 20th November, 1975, in Criminal Appeal No. 357 of 1975/ Murder Reference No. 84 of 1975).
----Art. 185 (3) read with Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑[Murder case] ‑ Appreciation of evidence‑Leave to appeal ‑ Prosecution witnesses, except for a witness not even ten years old, turning hostile‑ Witnesses examined to prove motive not supporting prosecution‑ Evidence of recovery of gun not relied upon by Sessions Court‑ Question whether norms for appraisal of evidence in criminal cases followed requiring further examination in circumstances, leave to appeal granted.
Muhammad Akhtar
Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed Wajid Hussain Shah, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for the State
Date of hearing : 9th March, 1976.
‑‑This petition has been filed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court confirming the sentence of death passed against the petitioner by the Sessions Judge, Sargodha, for the murder of Mst. Bibi on 22‑11‑1972.
According to the prosecution P. Ws. Gamman, Mirza and Mst. Sato were the eye‑witnesses of the murder: The weapon used for the murder was a gun which, according to the prosecution, had been recovered at the instance of the petitioner on 4‑1‑1973 from his kotha. And the motive for the crime was that the deceased was the petitioner's aunt and was suspected of having an illicit connection with P. W. Nazir. It was also alleged that the deceased had refused to bide "suspected articles" from the petitioner therefore, on this ground also the petitioner had a grudge against the deceased.
Unfortunately for the prosecution, the eye‑witnesses turned hostile except for P. W. Mirza, the son of P. W. Gamman. But P. W. Mirz was not even ten years old at the time of the murder. The witness examined to prove the motive for the crime also did not support the prosecution, whilst the evidence of the recovery of the gun was not relied upon by the Sessions Court. In these circumstances the question whether the norms for the appraisal of evidence in criminal cases have been followed requires further examination. The question of sentence would also require examination. Accordingly, we grant leave.
Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer