PLD 1949

P (PLP)

KHASTA HUSSAIN and others‑Convict‑Appellants Versus CROWN‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Criminal Appeals No. 20, 21 and 22 of 1948, decided on 18th Octo ber, 194, from the order of Session Judge, Baluchistan, dated 31st July, 1948.
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation P (PLP)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members N/A
Parties KHASTA HUSSAIN and others‑Convict‑Appellants Versus CROWN‑Respondent
Primary Law Taking strict view of law his conviction would not have been illegal under section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act merely on the basis of the confession of Toti Khan in which its maker implicates himself as much as his co accused, who he criminates, Conviction justified under section 114, illustration (a)., (b)‑ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Ss. 114 and 133‑Conviction on basis of confession of co‑accused upheld., The confessions by themselves sufficient for the conviction of their makers, especially when corroboration in material particulars is forth coming in the shape of recovery of a large part of the stolen property
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Taking strict view of law his conviction would not have been illegal under section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act merely on the basis of the confession of Toti Khan in which its maker implicates himself as much as his co accused, who he criminates, Conviction justified under section 114, illustration (a)., (b)‑ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Ss. 114 and 133‑Conviction on basis of confession of co‑accused upheld., The confessions by themselves sufficient for the conviction of their makers, especially when corroboration in material particulars is forth coming in the shape of recovery of a large part of the stolen property, (a) Indian Penal Code, 1860), Ss. 380, 457, 461 and 109‑ Convictinn on basis of confessions made without any inducement or promise and recovery of booty only held justified. as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: P (PLP) (KHASTA HUSSAIN and others‑Convict‑Appellants Versus CROWN‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Taking strict view of law his conviction would not have been illegal under section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act merely on the basis of the confession of Toti Khan in which its maker implicates himself as much as his co accused, who he criminates, Conviction justified under section 114, illustration (a). (b)‑ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Ss. 114 and 133‑Conviction on basis of confession of co‑accused upheld. The confessions by themselves sufficient for the conviction of their makers, especially when corroboration in material particulars is forth coming in the shape of recovery of a large part of the stolen property (a) Indian Penal Code, 1860), Ss. 380, 457, 461 and 109‑ Convictinn on basis of confessions made without any inducement or promise and recovery of booty only held justified.