Stomach
Stomach legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Stomach Contents of-State of digestion-Not reliable test for fixing hour of death. The state of digestion of the contents of stomach is not a reliable test for fixing the hour of death.
"Stomach", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22035
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Stomach"
1982 P Cr
Before Munawar Ali Khan J Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1994 M L D 1043
SARWAR MASIH — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: Federal Shariat Court1985 S C M R 484
N/A
Court: ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34‑‑Leave to appeal granted to examine veracity of ocular testimony, in view of medical evidence to the effect that food was found present in small intestine as well as in the stomach of deceased whereas deceased was said to have taken his meals in morning at about sunrise and thereafter gone to sleep until his murder.‑‑Evidence.P L D 1982 Supreme Court 92
SWALI AND OTHERS‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: ‑‑ S. 302/34‑,Murder‑case‑Appreciation of evidence‑Deceased found to have bad three pellet injuries while his companion multiple small lacerated wounds above big wound, showing injuries being result of not one shot, there being no charring around margins of lace rated wounds‑Two shots consequently fired from different distances Presence of accused and time of occurrence established from un challenged testimony of a prosecution witness and such witness a disinterested witness and no reason suggested why such witness should tell a lie‑Witnesses being present no reason why they would not identify assailants who came so close to deceased and his companion as to fire gun from close range and to cause hatchet injuries on deceased's neck‑First Information Report recorded in morning and not at night when informant reached police station for reason of possibly S. H. O. being not available during midnight‑Stomach and intestines having been perforated contents of stomach likely to have passed oat. through perforations ‑ No question having been put to Doctor to establish that contents of stomach could still be there despite holes in stomach, nothing turns on presence or non‑presence of anything in stomach‑Nothing asked from S. H. O. as to why hatchet sent to Chemical Examiner after several months, nothing turns on delay simpliciter‑As for delay in forwarding crime empty and gun nothing on record showing as to when S. H. O. sent such articles to Superin tendent of Police and as such S. H. O. could not be held responsible for delay in transmitting such articles for chemical examination Ocular testimony of prosecution witnesses establishing guilt of appellant and such testimony being corroborated by recovery of gun from accused, crime empty having matched with such gun, and crime hatchet having been found to be blood‑stained, Courts below, held, rightly accepted such pieces of evidence and convicted accused appellants.‑Evidence.P L D 1958 (W
ASGHAR‑Convict‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court:1986 P L C 830
Messrs TEXTILE WINDING MACHINERY COMPANY Ltd. Versus Mst. AMINA BIBI
Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind1985 P Cr
MUHAMMAD AKHLAQUE and another‑‑Applicants Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Court: KarachiP L D 1975 Peshawar 43
RUSTAM‑Accused‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: High Court1985 P Cr
UMAR HAYAT‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and 4 others‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore