PLD 1979

PL D 1979 Karachi 583 (PLP)

MUHAMMAD-Appellant Versus THE STATE-Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
S. 154-First Information Report-Delay in registration-Absence of plausible explanation of convincing nature-Presumption that delay in registration of F. I. R. was used for purpose of manipulation of prosecution story.-First Information Report.
Decided Date
Criminal Appeals Nos. 137 and 141 of 1977, decided on 29th January 1979.
Honorable Judges
Sajjad Ali Shah and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation PL D 1979 Karachi 583 (PLP)
Forum / Court S. 154-First Information Report-Delay in registration-Absence of plausible explanation of convincing nature-Presumption that delay in registration of F. I. R. was used for purpose of manipulation of prosecution story.-First Information Report.
Bench Members Sajjad Ali Shah and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD-Appellant Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Primary Law (c) Criminal trial, (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in PL D 1979 Karachi 583 (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: (c) Criminal trial, (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case PL D 1979 Karachi 583 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the S. 154-First Information Report-Delay in registration-Absence of plausible explanation of convincing nature-Presumption that delay in registration of F. I. R. was used for purpose of manipulation of prosecution story.-First Information Report. bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: PL D 1979 Karachi 583 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD-Appellant Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(c) Criminal trial (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • M. Shakir Naqashbandl for Appellant.
  • Dates of hearing : 12th and 13th December 1978.

Headnotes / Summary

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-. S. 154-First Information Report-Delay in registration-Absence of plausible explanation of convincing nature-Presumption that delay in registration of F. I. R. was used for purpose of manipulation of prosecution story.-[First Information Report].

S. 302-Murder - Evidence - Medical evidence-Post-mortem report showing that charring was present around wound

Inference that shot was fired from a close range of not more than four feet-Cartridge can be fired from pistol and if fired from short distance, it is possible to find a large number of pellets in body which depends on make of cartridge-Opinion of Doctor that only one shot was fired, there being one wound of entry-Held, cannot be doubted.-[Medical evidence]. Dr. Sydney Smith on Taylor's Principles and Practice of Medical Jurispru dence, p. 441; Haq Nawaz v. State P L D 1959 Kar. 137 and Modf on Medical Jurisprudence & Toxicology, p. 218 ref: -- [Murder-case] - Evidence-Recovery of incriminating articles- ; Evidence of Investigating Officer can be relied upon and treated at. par with any other eye-witness in facts and circumstances of a case-Sealed. parcels of crime empty recovered from spot and pistol recovered from accused sent to Ballistic Expert after a delay of about one year-Such inordinate delay coupled with infirmities in , evidence of interested eye-witnesses and delay in filing F. I. R.- Evidence of Investigating Officer in absence of mashirs on point of recovery of incriminating articles-Held, cannot be relied upon, in circumstances of case.-.[Evidence].

S. 302--Murder-Evidence produced by prosecution not conclusive and satisfactory in nature and insufficient to connect accused with commission of crime

Accused given benefit of doubt and con viction and sentence set aside. - [Evidence-Benefit of doubt]. Manzoor Hussain for the State.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑ S. 302‑MurderEvidenceMedical evidencePost‑mortem report showing that charring was present around wound

Inference that shot was fired from a close range of not more than four feet‑Cartridge can be fired from pistol and if fired from short distance, it is possible to find a large number of pellets in body which depends on make of cartridge‑Opinion of Doctor that only one shot was fired, there being one wound of entry‑Held, cannot be doubted.‑[Medical evidence]. Dr. Sydney Smith on Taylor's Principles and Practice of Medical Jurispru dence, p. 441; Haq Nawaz v. State P L D 1959 Kar. 137 and Modf on Medical Jurisprudence & Toxicology, p. 218 ref: (c) Criminal trial‑ ‑‑ [Murdercase] ‑ EvidenceRecovery of incriminating articles‑ ; Evidence of Investigating Officer can be relied upon and treated at. par with any other eye‑witness in facts and circumstances of a case‑Sealed. parcels of crime empty recovered from spot and pistol recovered from accused sent to Ballistic Expert after a delay of about one year‑Such inordinate delay coupled with infirmities in , evidence of interested eye‑witnesses and delay in filing F. I. R.‑ Evidence of Investigating Officer in absence of mashirs on point of recovery of incriminating articlesHeld, cannot be relied upon, in circumstances of case.‑.[Evidence]. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ ‑‑‑ S. 302‑‑MurderEvidence produced by prosecution not conclusive and satisfactory in nature and insufficient to connect accused with commission of crime‑‑‑Accused given benefit of doubt and con viction and sentence set aside. ‑ [EvidenceBenefit of doubt]. M. Shakir Naqashbandl for Appellant. Manzoor Hussain for the State. Dates of hearing : 12th and 13th December 1978.