Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous in Criminal Appeal No. 464 of 1981, decided on 31st August, 1981.

‑‑‑--S. 426‑Sentence, suspension of‑Trial Court disbelieving pro secution evidence and basing conviction on statement of petitioner without accepting it in its entirety ‑Question whether trial Court justified in excluding exculpatory part of statement requiring serious consideration‑Sentence suspended in circumstances.

Raja Muhammad Anwar and Raja Muhammad Sabir for Petitioner.

Sardar Muhammad Khurshid for the State.

This is an application on behalf of Sanatta appellant under section 426, Cr. P. C. for the. suspension of the execution of his sentence. Be was convicted under section 304; Part I, P.P.C.. by Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang and sentenced to 10 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5.000 or in default of payment of fine to further R.I. for two years. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the learned trial Court in pares. Nos. 15 and 16, after having disbelieved the prosecution evince ha based conviction on the statement of the appellant without accepting it in its entirety. The question whether in the circumstance, the trial Court was justified in excluding exculpatory part of the statement of the appellant needs serious consideration. Execution of the sentence is, therefore suspended and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the suns of Rs. 10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Chiniot.

M.Y.M. Bail granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.