ASLAM and others vs THE STATE and others
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon petitions for leave to appeal arising from a criminal case. The core legal questions concern whether corroboration of the ocular account was necessary, whether medical evidence indicating two firearm wounds of entry of almost the same dimension in the face region of the deceased—which could result from a single fire according to the medical officer—provided the requisite corroboration against each of the petitioners, and whether the principle of vicarious liability was attracted based on the evidence on record. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine these questions regarding corroboration and vicarious liability. The key principle laid down involves the scrutiny of medical evidence vis-a-vis ocular testimony for the purpose of corroboration in criminal trials.
- Whether corroboration of the ocular account was necessary in the case?
- Whether medical evidence showing two firearm wounds of entry of almost the same dimension resulting from a single fire provided the requisite corroboration against the petitioners?
- Whether the principle of vicarious liability was attracted in view of the evidence on record?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.---Leave to appeal is granted to consider inter alia whether corroboration of the ocular account was necessary and if so, whether the. Medical evidence showing two fire-arm wounds of entry of almost the same dimension in the face region of the deceased, which according to the doctor could result from a single fire, had provided the requisite corroboration against each of the two petitioners.
2. CRIMINAL PETITION No,171/L/1993 Since leave to appeal has been granted in the connected petition by the convicts, we also grant leave in this petition to consider whether in view of the evidence on the record the principle of vicarious liability was attracted in this case.