Home Maxims & Terms Prosecution case meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Prosecution case

Prosecution case legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2020 MLD 1515 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Prosecution caseMinor contradictionScope

Minor contradictions in the prosecution case would not be of any significance.

2014 PCrLJ 504 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S. 302(b)Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120Qatl-e-amdAppreciation of evidenceProsecution caseOnus to prove

Accused was convicted by Trial Court for committing murder of 7 years old young girl and was sentenced to imprisonment for life

Allegations by prosecution to the effect that accused had taken deceased with him on the date, time and at the place of incident; he alone was present with her when incident happened; and he was found with her by eyewitnesses, not only remained un-rebutted but such facts/allegations also stood admitted before Trial Court

Burden to prove such facts/allegations was on prosecution and the same stood proved

No contradiction was noticed in evidence of complainant and other eyewitnesses, as all of them testified that when they reached at the place of incident after hearing cries of deceased girl, they had found accused sitting on the chest of deceased with both his hands around her neck and he was strangulating her

More than sufficient and unchallenged ocular and medical evidence existed against accused before Trial Court to convict him for murder of minor girl and case against him was proved beyond any shadow of doubt

Findings of Trial Court were based on sound reasoning and correct and proper appreciation of evidence on record

High Court declined to interfere in judgment passed by Trial Court as the Court had already taken a lenient view by not awarding sentence of death to accused

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Prosecution case", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124944861

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Prosecution case"

PCRLJ 2013
2012-November-29

2013 P Cr

ABDUL GHAFOOR — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent

Court: Sindh
PLD 1994
Criminal Petition No.36‑P of 1992, decided on 25th October, 1993.

P L D 1994 Supreme Court 338

ABDULWAHAB ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus TARIQ HASSAN and another‑‑‑Respondents

Court:
SCMR 1981
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 375 of 1979, decided on 26th October, 1980. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 30-6-1979 passed in Criminal Revision No. 929 of 1978).

1981 S C M R 294

ABDUR RAHIM AND 14 OTHERS — Petitioners Versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER-Respondents

Court: -- S. 493-Public Prosecutor-Duties and responsibilities of-Public Prosecutor though responsible for conducting prosecution of case entrusted to him and empowered to choose which witnesses to produce at trial and which to be given up as unnecessary or having been won over, yet in making such selection he must act with great care and responsibility-Court cannot be expected to sit as silent spectator even when it notices non-production of certain witnesses to be likely to result in miscarriage of justice--Proper course when Court smells foul play : to ascertain facts himself directly from witnesses Enough material existing on record to conclude giving up of all remaining prosecution witnesses by Public Prosecutor being reckless and perhaps at instigation of, if not in collusion with, persons interested in stifling prosecution case, and affidavits filed by remaining witnesses showing such witnesses having not been won over and willing to support prosecution version, High Court, held, perfectly justified in setting aside acquittal of respondents and ordering their retrial: Witness-Appeal against acquittal.
PCRLJ 1998
Criminal Appeals Nos.64 and 68 of 1991, decided on 12th December, 1997.

1998 P Cr

ALI NAWAZ and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1979
Criminal Appeal No. 10‑P of 1978, decided on 3rd July 1979.

1979 S C M R 589

MUSA KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court: ----S. 304/34‑Murder‑case‑Appeal‑Appreciation of evidence Altercation allegedly taking place between parties but deceased not alleged to have given any provocation‑Accused as such had no apparent cause or motive to attack and kill deceased‑Real source of fight not disclosed by concerned prosecution witnesses‑Motive as alleged not bringing offence home to accused‑F. I. R. stating there being no previous enmity between parties but one of prosecution witnesses forced to admit in cross‑examination of existence of some blood feud between parties due to murder of a relation of complainant party in which case one of appellants involved‑Prosecution not placing its case in a straightforward manner‑Medical evidence instead of advancing prosecution case giving it a serious jolt‑Deceased, according to medical evidence, not found to have any blunt weapon injury on his person as alleged to have been inflicted by blunt side of hatchets‑Medical evidence also showing one of appellants having two injuries on his person‑Neither in F. I. R. nor in whole prosecution case such injuries on person of accused found any mention nor any explanation given for such injuries‑Such injuries could not be used as a hallmark of presence of accused on spot due to implication of injuries on accused being no part of prosecution case nor could such circumstance constitute an incriminating circumstance‑Accused's admission having received injuries in instant case in his statement under S. 342, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 being not placed on record of instant case, and even otherwise such being hardly a statement as could incriminate appellant or support prosecution case, lower Court, held, committed a legal error in using such factor as proving guilt of appellant‑Prosecution witnesses closely related inter se and to deceased hence not reliable without strong independent corrobora tion‑No such corroborating evidence existing and witnesses on other hand appearing to have purged themselves in falsely implicating acquitted accused and their statements also belied by medical evidence‑F. I. R. appearing to have been recorded after spot ins pection ‑and due deliberations long after actual occurrence‑Levy police post existing at a distance of 200 paces but report not lodged there but lodged at a police station ten miles away‑Prosecution case, held, not established beyond reasonable doubt and trial Court justified in acquitting accused appellant.‑Evidence.
MLD 2004
Criminal Miscellaneous No.3287‑B of 2003, decided on 24th June, 2003.

2004 M L D 65

KAZIM and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
MLD 2015
2014-March-20

2015 M L D 424

NASEEB GUL PATHAN — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent

Court: Sindh
YLR 2023
N/A

2023 Y L R 1418

MUHAMMAD YAQOOB — Appellant Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Court: Lahore
YLR 2013
Criminal Appeal No.140 of 2012, decided on 28th January, 2013.

2013 Y L R 1442

SHER WALI and another — Appellants Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Court: Peshawar
PCRLJ 2016
N/A

2016 P Cr

ZAFAR IQBAL — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent

Court: Lahore