Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KARAM HUSSAIN VS Respondent: THE CROWNHonorable Justice AKRAMMushtaq Hussain Khan,A. R. Changez
1969 P Cr
1969 P Cr. L J 898
[Supreme Court]
Present: Muhammad Munir, C. J., A. S. M. Akram, M. Shahabuddin and Muhammad Sharif, JJ
KARAM HUSSAIN‑Appellant
Versus
THE CROWN‑Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1956, decided on 18th January 1956.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan at Lahore; dated the 6th of July 1955, in Criminal Appeal No. 359 of 1955/Murder Reference No. 99 of 1955).
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑Special leave to appeal to Supreme Court‑-Leave granted to consider whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to connect appellant with crime committed.
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑Conviction resting on retracted confession together with circumstantial evidence that knife and shirt recovered from accused were found stained with blood‑Conviction, held, proper.
Mushtaq Hussain Khan, Advocate Federal Court for Appellant.
A. R. Changez, Advocate‑General West Pakistan (M. Z. Kitchlew, Advocate Federal Court with him) instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 18th January 1956.
JUDGMENT
AKRAM, J.‑This appeal by our leave arises out of a judgment of the High Court of West Pakistan Lahore, dismissing appellant Karam Hussain's appeal and confirming the sentence of death passed upon him by the Sessions Judge of Jhelum under section 302, Penal Code for the murder of Ghulam Haider, and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for five years under section 394, Penal Code for committing robbery.
The case for the prosecution was that on the night of the 1st October 1954 when Ghulam Haider was proceeding on foot from Dina Railway Station towards his village Gagar Kalan, two men, namely, the appellant and one Muhammad Zaman, approached him and said that they were going also to the same village, but after going together for some time Muhammad Zaman co‑accused caught hold of Ghulam Haider while the appel lant stabbed him in the abdomen with a knife Exh. P. M. (P. 22) and then both of them ran away taking along with themselves a bag Exh. P. H. (P. 16) which belonged to Ghulam Haider deceased and contained pieces of cloth Exh. P. L. (P. 20 and P. 21) along with certain other pieces Exh. P. H. (P. 13 to P. 15) and a new pair of shoes Exh. P. J. (P. 17 and P. 18); that while running away the appellant had left behind one of his chappals Exh. P. E. (P.9) at the place where the crime was committed; that Ghulam Haider died after a short time of his injury in the Civil Hospital at Jhelum.
The defence was a simple denial of the prosecution allegation.
There was no direct evidence in the case and the appellant's conviction rested upon his retracted confession and the circum stance that the shirt taken from his person and the knife produced by him were found to be stained with human blood; further the pieces of clothes Exh. P. L. (P. 20 and P. 21) recovered at his instance were also found to tally with the description given in the dying declaration of Ghulam Haider, which was treated as F. I. R. (Exh. P. A./1), and the retracted confession of the appellant (Exh. P. Y).
The only question on which leave to appeal was granted by this Court was whether the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to connect the appellant with the crime committed. After going through the evidence with the assistance of the counsel for the appellant we think that the above question must be answered in the affirmative. The dying declaration made by the deceased, which was treated as the F. I. R., the recovery of the blood‑stained shirt and knife and the different recoveries made at the instance of the appellant, amply confirm the truth of the statements contained in the confession of the appellant (Exh. P. Y.), and connect him with the crime. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.