Pakistan Case Law
2007 SCMR 1402

MUHAMMAD NAZIM and others vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2007 SCMR 1402
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petitions Nos.109-L and 110-L of 2005
Date2006-04-05
Judge(s)Javed Iqbal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi
Authored byJaved Iqbal
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns criminal petitions for leave to appeal against a judgment involving the imposition of capital punishment. The core legal questions before the Supreme Court of Pakistan involve whether the evidence presented was appreciated in accordance with settled norms of justice and established principles for the safe administration of criminal justice. Specifically, the Court examines whether capital punishment can be sustained based on the testimony of interested and partisan witnesses, particularly in the absence of independent corroboration and given an admitted background of enmity between the parties. Furthermore, the Court addresses the legal significance of the factum of abscondence as a potential corroboratory piece of evidence in capital cases, questioning whether the impugned judgment aligns with established precedents regarding the evidentiary weight of abscondence. The Court granted leave to appeal, determining that these issues require a thorough review of the record to ensure the judgment is in consonance with the law, thereby setting the stage for a detailed examination of the sufficiency and reliability of the evidence supporting the convictions.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can capital punishment be awarded based solely on the testimony of interested witnesses without independent corroboration?
  • Does an admitted background of enmity necessitate higher standards of corroboration for conviction in capital cases?
  • Can the factum of abscondence serve as a corroboratory piece of evidence sufficient to support a conviction involving capital punishment?
capital punishmentinterested witnessescorroborationabscondenceappreciation of evidenceleave to appealcriminal law

ORDER

1. ' JAVED IQBAL, J.--- Heard Sayyed Mazhar All Akbar Naqvi, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner (in Criminal Petition No, 109-L of 2005) and Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mr. Nasiruddin Khan Nayyar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for petitioner (in Criminal Petition No,110-L of 2005), as well as Mr. Zahid Hussain Bukhari, learned Advocate Supreme Court for complainant, scanned the entire record with their eminent assistance and perused the judgment impugned with care and caution. We are inclined to grant leave in the above captioned petitions, inter alia, on the following points:--

(i) Whether the evidence which had come on record has been appreciated in its true perspective in accordance, with the settled norms of justice and the well-entrenched principles enunciated by Supreme Court qua the safe administration of justice?

(ii) Whether the capital punishment could have been awarded on the basis of interested and partisan evidence furnished by the interested witnesses in absence of any corroboration and in view of admitted background of enmity?

(iii) Whether the factum of abscission can be considered as corroboratory piece of evidence in case of capital punishment?

(iv) Whether the judgment impugned is in consonance with the law laid down by this Court in case Rasool Muhammad v. Asal Muhammad 1995 SCM R 1373 qua factum of abscission.

2. ' The appeals may be fixed at some early date.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.