Skip to main content

You're using an out-of-date version of Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds
to upgrade your browser.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Home

Analytics

Sessions

PREMIUM

  Upload

NotificationsMark All as Read

mahnoor paracha
View Profile

Upgrade to Premium

Sessions

Library

Search AlertsNEW

Find Friends

Reading History

Account Settings

Log Out

   mahnoor paracha

View Profile

Upgrade to PremiumUpgrade

Home

Analytics

Grants

Sessions

Readers

Notifications

Messages
Library

Find Friends

Reading History

Account Settings

Log Out

more 

Job Board

About

Press

Blog

People

Papers

Terms

Privacy

Copyright

 We're Hiring!

 Help Center

less 

Asad thesis Final IA

asad

Rizwan Ali
Show more information ▾

Publication Name: asad

Show less ▴

161 Views

•PaperRank:

Download PDF

Bulk Download (20 Papers)

Save to Library

Library

Share

More

Report

Publication Name: asad

Loading Preview

scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd. scribd.

LEGAL-VALUATION OF ACCOMPLICES

’ DEPOSITION IN
CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE AND THE ESSENTIALITY OF INDEPENDENT CORROBORATION

Supervised by: Madam Malieka Farha Deeba Group Members

Muhammad Asad Abbas Raja (01-177131-048) Fakhar Abbas (01-177131-006) AhmarJarral (01-177131-
018) Date of Submission:

08-12-2017

Department of Law Bahria University Islamabad

Table of Contents

SUPERVISOR’S APPROVAL

.................................................................................................................... iii

DECLARATION OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN RESEARCH

 .................................................................. iv

PLAGIARISM REPORT

 .............................................................................................................................. v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

 .............................................................................................................................. vi

DEDICATION
 ............................................................................................................................................ vii

TABLE OF CASES

 ................................................................................................................................... viii

ABSTRACTS

 .............................................................................................................................................. xi

Title for Research Project

 ............................................................................................................................. 1

Research Statement

 ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction

 ................................................................................................................................................... 1

Literature Review

 .......................................................................................................................................... 4

Objective of Research

 ................................................................................................................................... 8

Research Questions

 ....................................................................................................................................... 8

Research Methodology

 ................................................................................................................................. 9

CHAPTER 1: Difference in between a General Witness and an Accomplice.

 ........................................... 10

1.1

Witness in General:

 ..................................................................................................................... 12
1.2

Witnesses under Islamic Jurisprudence

 ...................................................................................... 13

1.2.1

Witness under the Pakistani legal system

 ........................................................................... 15

1.3

Witness under Common Legal System (Credible witness)

 ......................................................... 16

1.4

Accomplice

 ................................................................................................................................. 19

1.4.1

Independent Corroboration

 ................................................................................................. 20

1.4.1.1

Corroboration

 ...................................................................................................................... 21

1.4.1.2
 

Independent witness and Accomplice

 ................................................................................. 23

1.4.2 Accomplice under Indian Law

 ................................................................................................... 23

1.4.3 Accomplice under Pakistan’s legal system

 ................................................................................ 24

Chapter 2: Rules of Corroboration and the necessity of Independent Corroboration.

 ................................ 27

2.1 How corroboration takes place.

 ........................................................................................................ 28

2.1.1.1 Corroboration of evidence produced by an accomplice

 .......................................................... 31

2.1.1.2 Corroboration of accomplice’s evidence with Hearsay evidence

 ........................................... 31

ii

2.1.1.3 Recovery and Corroboration

 ................................................................................................... 31

2.1.1.4 Material points suggesting link between crime and accused.

 ................................................. 32

2.1.2 Nature and extent of corroboration

 ............................................................................................ 32

2.2 Corroboration of accomplice’s evidence under 

 The Police Rules 1934.

 .......................................... 33

2.2.1 Procedure of Recording

 ............................................................................................................. 34

2.3 Recording of statement under the code of criminal procedure 1898.

 ............................................... 35

2.3.1 Difference in between statements recorded under section 164 and 337 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure 1898.

 .................................................................................................................................. 36

2.3.2 Can an approver be tried again as an accused or Post trial Status.

............................................. 37

2.4 Accomplice under the perspective of Islamic Jurisprudence.

 ........................................................... 37

2.5 Principles of corroboration under Common law.

 .............................................................................. 39

2.6 Pakistani courts and Accomplices and the Test cases.

 ...................................................................... 39

2.7 Quantum of Sentence on an approver’s deposition.

.......................................................................... 41

2.8The Importance & Vitality of Independent Corroboration

 ................................................................ 42

Recommendations and Conclusion

 ............................................................................................................. 46

The term independent corroboration be added in the existing article of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order
1984.

 ....................................................................................................................................................... 46

Existing article be brought within the Ambit of Quran and Sunnah as per article 227 of the Constitution
of Pakistan.
 .............................................................................................................................................. 47

Conclusion

 .............................................................................................................................................. 48

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 ....................................................................................................................................... 49

ARTICLES

 ............................................................................................................................................. 49

BOOKS

 ................................................................................................................................................... 49

CASES

 .................................................................................................................................................... 50

DICTIONARIES

..................................................................................................................................... 53

REPORTERS

 .......................................................................................................................................... 53

STATUTES

: ........................................................................................................................................... 53

iii

Research Project for the Degree of LL.B.

SUPERVISOR’S APPROVAL

I hereby, forward this work done by Muhammad Asad Abbas Raja, Fakhar Abbas, and Ahmar Jarral, to
the Research Committee for final evaluation.

Name of Supervisor: Malieka Farha Deeba Malik

Supervisor’s Signature: ________________ 

 8

th

 December, 2017

Department of Law Bahria University, Islamabad Research Project for the Degree of LL.B.

iv

DECLARATION OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN RESEARCH

We, as students of Bahria University, hereby declare that firstly, we have abided by the research ethics
while writing this research project. Secondly, we have not committed any acts that may discredit or
damage the credibility of our research. These include, but are not limited to: falsification, distortion of
research findings, or plagiarism. Thirdly, we have subjected this work to plagiarism check before
submitting the research  project. Date: 8

th

 December, 2017 Degree: LL.B. Department: Law  Name of Supervisor: Maleika Farha Deeba Malik
Name and Signature of Students: Muhammad Asad Abbas Raja ____________,Fakhar Abbas
__________, andAhmar Jarral ____________.

PLAGIARISM REPORT

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Without Al

lah’s and His beloved Prophet’s

) help, this could not have been possible.

 Alhamdulillah
We express our gratitude to our families, whose unwavering support has been monumental at every
step of the way; to our supervisor Madam Maleika Farha Deeba Malik, who has guided and helped us,
and without whom, this journey would have been directionless; to our teachers, who have taught us
everything we know, and helped us realize the fact that we do not know much; and to our friends our
class especially , seniors and most of all juniors who have supported us through thick and thin. We
extend a special note of gratitude to our esteemed teacher of the Code of Criminal Procedure Mr.
Justice Ch. Abdul Aziz. We would also like to acknowledge the undeniable contribution of Sir Qaiser
Imam, and Sir Haroon Sami, who were always there to haunt our thesis-induced nightmares. It is
pertinent to mention that the faults within this research project shall not discredit these enlightened
and highly esteemed names, they are solely ours to claim. We hope and pray that our efforts have
produced something worthwhile. (Ameen)

vii

DEDICATION

Dedicated to the ever evolving jurisprudence of Pakistan to which fell prey the finest men including the
first ever democratically elected Prime Minister of Pakistan and the first ever democratically elected
President of Pakistan who completed his tenure & within the present scenario to the defenders of the
Khatam-e-Nabowat law (

) in Pakistan.

viii

TABLE OF CASES

Govt. Of Balochistan through additional Chief secretary v. AzizullahMemon and others (1993) 1 PLD (SC)
341 (PAK.)

 
Bhutto v the State (1979) 1 PLD (SC) 741 (PAK.)

Faisal v The State (2007) 3 PLD (KAR.) 544

Mst. Rasoolain Bibi v. State (2011) 3 P.L.J (C.R.C) 8 (PAK.)

Hussain v. The State (1993) 2 SCMR 785

Zaman v State (1999) 2 (SC) 1852 (PAK.)

Muhammad Usuf Khan v. Emperor (1929) 16 AIR (Nagpur) 215 (IND.)

Hassu v The Crown (1969) 2 P.Cr.L.J 1209 (PAK.)

Haider Hussain and others v Govt. of Pakistan (1991) 2(FSC) 139 (PAK.)

Lallu v State (2017) PLJ (Cr.C) 84 (PAK.)



Aurangzeb v State (1999)4 PLJ Cr.C (SAC) 91(PAK.)

Ahmad v State (1999)1 PLJ(SC) 105 (PAK.)

United States v. Blankenship 923 F.2d1110, (5

th

 Circuit Justice, DC Cir.) (1991).

Ali v State (2007) 3 MLD 1771 (PAK.)

 Narayan Chetan Ram ch v. State of Maharashtra (2000)87 AIR (SC) 3352 (IND.)

Ilyas v The State(2001) 1 PLD (SC) 333 (PAK.)

Shehzado v State and others(1977) 1 PLJ (SC) 278 (PAK.)

 
Ali v The State(1970) 2 (PCrLJ) 1292 (PAK.)

Rasheed v State (2003) 2 SCMR 799 (PAK.)

Shehzad v State (2002)2 SCMR 1009 (PAK.)

ix

Singh v State of Punjab (1953)40 AIR (SC) 364 (IND.)

Bhiva v state of Maharashtra (1963) 50 AIR (SC) 599 (IND.)

Mohan v. State of Utar pardesh (1954) 41AIR (SC) 637 (IND.)

Waheed v State (1995) 3 SCMR 1498 (PAK.)

Mstshehnaz Bibi v. M.Liaquat (2007) 3 SCMR 1438 (PAK.)


 

Masih v State(2002) 1PLD (SC) 643 (PAK.)

Ghafoor and others v State (1984) 2 PLD(Lah.) 441(PAK.)

Ali v The state(1967)1 PLD (SC) 545 (PAK.)

Khaliq v The State(1970) 1 PLD(SC) 166 (PAK.)

Mushtaq v The State (2005) Part III YLR 1728 (PAK.)

Darwesh and another v. The State (2014) YLR 2223 (PAK.)

Zardari v The State (2005)YLR 717 (PAK.)

Ahmad v The State (2003) 3 MLD 1627 (PAK.)

 
Mst. Laiba Anthony v. The State (2010) 2PCrLJ 531 (PAK.)

Rasheed v The State (1970) 1PCrLJ 722 (PAK.)

Alam v Riyasat (1983) SCMR 1127 (PAK.)

R v Baskerville [1916] UKKB 658

Davies v DPP [1954] UKHL 378.

 Niazi v Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif Prime Minister of Pakistan (2017) PLD (SC) 265 (PAK.)

State v. Abdus Sattar 1985 (NLR) Cr. 254 (PAK.)

Shah v. Ashiq Ali Shah etc. (1982) 2 SCMR 1110 (PAK.)

(2009) SCMR 23 (PAK.)

 

(1977) CriLJ 1206 (IND.)

(1954) I A.E.R 507

(1950) PLD (Lah) 115 (PAK)

(1957) AIR (All.) 391 (IND.)

(1985) 3 PLD (Lah.) 730 (PAK.)

(1984) NLR (Cr.) 34 (PAK.)

(1962) PLD(SC) 269 (PAK.)

 
(2011) YLR 1811 (PAK.)

(1956) PLD (FC) 140 (PAK.)

(1928) AIR (Lah.) 681 (IND.)

(1923) AIR (Lah.) 389 (IND.)

(1957) 2 PLD (Lah.) 1023 (PAK.)

(1959) 2 PLD (Lah.) 115 (PAK)

(2004) PCrLJ (PAK)

(1967) 1 PLD (SC) 545 (PAK.)

xi

ABSTRACTS
The following research project is related to the importance of Independent corroboration

of evidence with an accomplice’s evidence. It is high

light that the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order 1984 states than an accomplice is a competent witness against
the other co-accused and that his testimony cannot be discarded on the ground that there is no
independent corroboration to the evidence produced. In the following research different legal regimes
have been discussed where independent corroboration is insisted upon. It is also pertinent to mention
that under Islamic criminal justice system an evidence put forth by an accomplice is totally reject and in
its land mark decision the honorable Federal Shariat Court has not only termed it to be un-Islamic but
has also declared it null and void. Hence under different legal regimes and theories it is established that
Independent corroboration is not only necessary but if its not there then it will defeated the purpose of
justice.

Title for Research Project

LEGAL-VALUATION OF ACCOMPLICES

’ DEPOSITI

ON IN CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE AND THE ESSENTIALITY OF INDEPENDENT

CORROBORATION.

Research Statement

A court of law presiding over a criminal trial cannot solely rely upon the deposition of an
accomplice/approver for conviction andshould be supplemented by independent corroboration. Hence
Article 16 of the Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order needs to be amended that states accomplice is a competent
witness against a co-accused even without corroboration.

Introduction

Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisaged a country which would operate in abidance of the realms of Islamic
Jurisprudence where rule of law and independence of judiciary were one of the  basic norms. An
objectives resolution was passed by the first constituent assembly of Pakistan in which rule of law and
independence of judiciary

1
 were introduced as the fundamental features of the future constitution of Pakistan. Later objectives
resolution was made a substantive part of the Pakistani constitution under article 2-A and was upheld by
the judicator.

The Objectives Resolution: ANNEX

Wherein Shall be guaranteed fundamental rights including equality of status, of opportunity and before
Law [****]. Wherein Independence of Judiciary shall be fully secured.

 Govt. Of Balochistan through additional Chief secretary v. AzizullahMemon and others (1993) 1 PLD (SC)
341 (PAK.)

At points of time in history the highest judicial forum of Pakistan have either under the influence of
pressure, ill-will or bias rendered judgments which stood in total negation of internationally accepted
norms & principles.

 These judgments have by virtue of their nature sneaked into the pages of history and have led to
settlement of bad precedence. It is therefore imperative that a thorough examination of certain matters
be carried out and the legal thought in relevant regard be reconstructed. The principles of fair trial and
law of evidence have always held an important place in criminal law.

 Sadly the courts in Pakistan at a number of times have derogated from these  principles of law. Such
instances have not only diminished the stature and reputation of the  judicature in public eyes but have
also resulted in the casting of long-lasting negative effects the motif of jurisprudence in Pakistan,
example in this regard can be taken of the principle of benefit of doubt which is the foremost and the
basic principle of criminal law.

 It is also a settled  principle of law that the court will not come to rescue the case of the prosecution.
6

 With regard to the statement of the subject thesis, the courts in Pakistan have time and again held that
corroboration is required in cases where evidence is put forth by an approver and the apex court of
Pakistan has termed it as a rule of prudence.

 Though a trial court is empowered with the authority to incriminate an accused solely on the evidence
produced by an approver 

 but many legal impediments stand in the way of pronouncing a conviction. An approver, though reliable
in general terms cannot be equated with an independent witness. The reason for this discrimination is
simple and legally comprehendible, an approver without doubt

 Bhutto v the State (1979) 1 PLD (SC) 741 (PAK.)

 Faisal v The State (2007) 3 PLD (KAR.) 544

Mst. Rasoolain Bibi v. State (2011) 3 P.L.J (C.R.C) 8 (PAK.)

(2009) SCMR 23 (PAK.)

 Hussain v. The State (1993) 2 SCMR 785

 PAK CODE

 The Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order Art. 16,(1984)

: An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person, except in the case of an
offence punishable with hadd and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the
uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
 

and according to his own admission along with that of the prosecution provides a testimony on the basis
of an assurance that he shall be dealt with lightly and the law shall be not be stringently enforced in his
case. This assurance qualifies to be an Influencing Factor which is very likely to affect the contents, tone
and tenor of his testimony. Such a testimony is neither forthcoming nor voluntary in nature and thus
does not fall within the definition of Confidence Inspiring testimony. In addition to the aforesaid the
Character of a witness is also very vital when it comes to  placing reliance upon his testimony. In Islamic
Jurisprudence (which is part and partial of

Pakistan’s legal structure and assumes a central role in our national genesis) a

 witness is only considered competent if he is religiously and morally upright person.

 The common law also does neglect the reputation and standing of a witness and does take into
consideration the chapters of past life, his abidance of law and the cleanliness of his available record.
When seen in view of these prisms, an Approver appears to be imperfect and degenerated figure to say
the least.

10

 Not only his immediate past is ridden with guilt but he also has prima facie accepted the same without
much remorse or sorrow. Many notable jurists have in the past referred to an Approver as a Moral
Wretch

11

 who has been an accomplice n the alleged crime but at a later stage had turned his back on his former
partner for selfish gains.

12

 It is for these reasons that an Approver is rarely considered Trustworthy in material terms and his
statement is viewed with acute suspicion.

PAK CODE

The Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order Art, 3 (1984): Who may testify:

 Provided further that the court shall determine the competence of a witness in accordance with the
qualifications prescribed by the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah for a
witness, PLD 1985 Lah. 730.

10

 Shekhar v jagiwanBaksh Singh and another (1929) 16 AIR (Nagpur) 215 (IND.)

11

 Id 

..

12

Before the circuit court of the United States, Holden at Boston,

The Trial of J W, F Frederick, Etc on an  Indictment for Murder on the High Seas;

 (1 edn, BOSTON: Russell and Gardner 1819) 39

The said suspicion which naturally stands associated with an approver due to the stigma attached to
him, makes his testimony defected in due course. This defect can only be cured by one mean and that is
providence of material corroboration.

13

 This corroboration should chronologically validate the subject Testimony

and fill all void present in the prosecution’s case.

Only under such a circumstance can the judicial conscience be satisfied and a presiding judge can arrive
at his judgment of a conviction.
Literature Review

The origin of criminal law can be traced back to centuries. It can be easily said that this  branch of law is
as old as crime itself. Romans were not only known to crime but also to the criminal justice system.

14

 The term crime is defined as;

“A positive or negative act in violation of a penal law”

15

 meaning thereby that if an if there is an omission from the principle that has been laid down by a penal,
that omission will be known as a crime and the law dealing with such an omission will be known as
criminal law. Criminal law and law of evidence are closely related to each other. As the objectives which
are mentioned in a penal code are to be attained through a procedure and within that procedure we

require evidence. The term evidence has been defined as “any specie of proof legally presented

at the trial of an issue by the act of parties, through the medium of witnesses, documents and e

tc”

16

. So by this definition is quite clear that to prove a case some sort of evidence is required and when we
go deep into the details of evidence we come to know of its types such as which evidence is admissible
and which not whereas which evidence requires independent corporation and which not.

13

 (1977) CriLJ 1206 (IND.)

14

ENRY

 C

AMPBELL

 B

LACK 

,B
LACK'S

 L

AW

 D

ICTIONARY 3

(4

TH

 ed. 1968)

15

 Id..

at 444

16

 Id 

 at 656

25

term accomplice can also be seen in Chapter 25 Rule 27 of the Police Rules 1934.

120

 The term is also enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure under section 337.

121

 The law in Pakistan while corroborating the evidence produced by an accomplice has  barred matters
pertaining to Hudood. As we have discussed that there seems to be a contradiction in between article
16 and illustration (b) provided under article 129 of the Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order 1984. The courts in
this regard have held that the former is a provision of law whereas the later is a rule of prudence.

122
 The courts in Pakistan have not only gone for independent corroboration but have

also convicted accused’s on the sole testimony of an accomplice. In the

following para we will discuss a couple of judgments of the honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan in
which contradictory precedents were established. In

 Abdul Waheed v. The State

123

 the supreme court of Pakistan observed that an accomplice was not only a person of unworthy credit
and but was also indeed a dishonest person. His evidence was to be discarded and that independent
material corroboration is necessary for conviction as the lower court had convicted the accused on the
solitary evidence produced by an accomplice. On contrary to this the supreme court of Pakistan in

 Munawar Hussain alias Bobi v. The State

124

observed that under certain circumstances the evidence produced by an accomplice needs no
corroboration. It was held that if the court is satisfied then there is no need of corroboration. By the
above citied judgments a situation has arisen in front of us where contradicting  judgments of the apex
court of Pakistan are in front of us hence the principle of prudence which

120

PAK CODE THE POLICE RULES Chapter 25 Rule 27,(1934)

121

 PAK CODE THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, Sec 337, (1898)

122

Shahbaz Ahmed Cheema, Corroborating evidence in Pakistan, A Mechanism to fill relaiablityvaccum,

SSRN. 11

123

 Waheed v State (1995) 3 SCMR 1498 (PAK.)

124

 Hussain v State (1993)2 SCMR 785 (PAK.)

 
26

has been discussed earlier loses its shine. Sotherefore it is important that independent corroboration
shall be made necessary by all means. To conclude this chapter we can safely say that after going
through the settled principles of witnesses under Islamic Law, Common Law and

other relevant laws it is the need of the time that independent corroboration with an approver’s

evidence be brought in the order through a legislative amendment.

27

Chapter 2: Rules of Corroboration and the necessity of Independent Corroboration.

Law is a developing phenomena and it develops from time to time because as per the essence of law, it
cannot be static. Eve

n Iqbal termed the concept of Ijtehad as Islam’s principle

of movement in law.

125

 Every legal system in this world is based on philosophies, theories and interpretations. Today we have
those philosophies in a codified from in front of us and are known as statues or acts. It is important for
us to understand that for the development of any legal system these theories, ideas and philosophies
hold the position of a grund norm.

126

 The term corroboration has already been discussed in detail in Chapter 1. The term corroboration has
been discussed as a rule of prudence by the courts. The following chapter will in detail discuss the rules
of

corroboration of an accomplice’s evidence un

der Pakistani law, this part will be covered or will  be seen in the light of three basic laws, The Police
Rules 1934, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, The Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order 1984 and during this we will
also see that how the Pakistani courts have dealt with it. From here onwards we will move our
discussion towards the Islamic  perspective of corroboration that what rules of corroboration are there
in Islam. We will also go through the rules of corroboration mentioned or enshrined under common law.
During this discussion our discussion would also go through the idea that that how Indian courts have
dealt with the concept of corroboration. The last part of this chapter will deal with the necessity of
independent corroboration. Why independent corroboration is necessary

125

UHAMMAD

QBAL, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ISLAM, SUPS.CA. 63 (2012.)

126

K 

ELSON, PURE THEORY OF LAW, Law book Exchange ltd. (2005)

28

and that why it shall be included within the statute, During this a number of theories of interpretation
will also be discussed such as the literal theory, golden theory and others through which we will try to
explain the necessity of independent corroboration.

2.1 How corroboration takes place.

The term corroboration has been defined in the previous chapter and it means the one which
strengthens, confirms or makes something more certain.

127

 The following discussion will take place upon the idea that how corroboration of evidence takes place
within the criminal  justice system. There are some basic principles in criminal law which are known as
the cardinal  principles. On the very outset is presumption of innocence. That accused is the favorite
child of the court and is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

128

 On the other hand when  prosecution is to prove its case through circumstantial evidence then the rule
is that one end of the rope shall be tied with the neck of the accused whereas the other end of the rope
must be linked with the chain of evidence. In the

following discussion we will see that how accomplice’s

evidence is corroborated with the other evidence present on record. Then our discussion will

move towards the proposition that how an accomplice’s evidence is corroborated with the

circumstantial evidence. During this discussion both last seen and waj-takar evidence will be discussed.
We have already discussed in the previous chapter that corroboration is to understood from two
different perspectives

129

127

1, VICTORIA NEUFELDT, DAVID B. GURALNIK 

, Webster’s New World Collage dictionary, 312, 3

rd

, (1997)

128

 Zaman v State (1999) 2 PLJ(SC) 1852 (PAK.)

129

Shahbaz Ahmed Cheema, Corroborating evidence in Pakistan, A Mechanism to fill relaiablityvaccum,

SSRN. 3

29

Statutory requirement of not relying on the evidence produced by a single witness

Where evidence on record is not sufficient enough. Hence in the above mentioned situation
corroboration of evidence takes place. The first situation can be easily understood in pretext of Hudood
laws where the number of witnesses has  been ordained by the Holy Quran. In this proposition it is also
it is also pertinent to mention that even the Justinian code regarded a single witness in certain aspect as
insufficient.

130

 In regards to the second outset i:e where evidence on record is not sufficient. Corroboration of
evidence holds immense importance. Corroborative evidence in this situation ushers or supports the
reliability of evidence produced because it is not conclusive.

131

 It can be safely said that the technique behind corroboration of evidence is to rectify the defects or it is
better to that corroboration fills in the cracks which were there in the original evidence. In order to
corroborate evidence under the Pakistani law of evidence, Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order 1984 is structured
in such a way that it revolves around the relevancy of facts. Such as under article 21 of the Qanoon-e-
Shahadat order any fact that leads towards motive is a relevant fact. In order to understand
corroboration we shall firstly go through the concept of relevant fact. The term relevant fact can defined
as facts which are necessary to explain the happening. The statute is also structured in such a way that it
revolves around the relevancy of certain types of evidences.

130

 Id..

131

 Id..

30

The technique of corroboration in Pakistan is to be seen in two parts. The Supreme Court of Pakistan in

 Mst. Shehnaz Bibi v. Muhammad Liaquat alias Khitta

132

 when the original evidence produced is of doubtful character corroboration will sought. Similarly the
honorable Peshawar High Court has ruled that if the original evidence is of doubtful veracity then
independent corroboration will be sought.
133

 The Supreme Court of Pakistan in

Shera Masih v State

134

 pointed out that independent corroboration is required at a number of instances such as when there
exists enmity in between parties, witnesses are interested, inimical or not independent then
independent corroboration is necessary.  Now that we are discussing the technique of corroboration it is
important for us to understand the principals of corroboration. Principles of corroboration were
discussed in the infamous case of

 R v. Baskervillie

where it was held that corroboration of evidence shall be held in such a way that it connects the accused
with the crime. We have already discussed above that when evidence is direct there is no need of
corroboration.

135

 The law commission of India in its working paper 

136

 gave certain recommendation for corroboration of evidence. It has also been held that corroborative
evidence must be direct.

137

 On the first count it means that a witness cannot corroborate with his or her own evidence and it must
come from some independent source. Secondly it was pointed out that corroborative evidence must
implicate the accused.

138

 Though there are two different views upon this rule. The first one states that corroboration shall consist
of independent evidence that is verified by a part of statement produced by the witness

132

Mstshehnaz Bibi v. M.Liaquat (2007) 3 SCMR 1438 (PAK.)

133

(2004) PCrLJ (PAK)

134

 Masih v State(2002) 1PLD (SC) 643 (PAK.)

135

(2011) YLR 1811 (PAK.)

136

The Law Commission working paper no. 115 page 16 Published by HMSO London

137

 Id..

138

 Id..

31

 before the court whereas the second view which has been largely upheld states that accused must  be
implicated.

139

 On the third count the evidence put forth by an accomplice was discussed. It was guided

that accomplices cannot corroborate each other’s evidence.

140

 It was pointed out that

accomplice’s are party to the offence committed hence they cannot corroborate each other’s

evidence. The Pakistani courts have also held that the conduct of an accused is a corroborative  piece of
evidence.

141
 

2.1.1.1 Corroboration of evidence produced by an accomplice

After we have gone through the techniques of corroboration it is now time for us to see that in what
positions evidence produced by an accomplice is corroborated.

2.1.1.2

Corroboration of accomplice’s evidence with Hearsay evidence

Another important question arises in front of us and that is that whether evidence  produced by an
accomplice can be corroborated with the hearsay evidence. It was held by the court that any hearsay
statement produced by an accomplice cannot be  produced against an accused person but can be made
a tool to corroborate or to impeach a witnesses credit but in no case they are substantive piece of
evidence.

142

2.1.1.3 Recovery and Corroboration

139

 Id..

at17

140

 Id..

141

 (1956) PLD (FC) 140 (PAK.)

142

 (1928) AIR (Lah.) 681 (IND.)

 
32

It has been held that recovery of articles connected with offence are sufficient enough to corroborate
with an the evidence produced by an accomplice.

143

 It was also upheld by the courts that if the deceased was last seen by with the accused and a blood
stained hatched was recovered at the instance of the accused that would constitute corroboration.

144

 It has also been taken into consideration by the courts that where an approver was corroborated by the
production of weapon used in the offence for killing and other similar evidence then that would
constitute sufficient corroboration.

145

2.1.1.4 Material points suggesting link between crime and accused.

If a statement produced by an accomplice creates or suggests a link between the crime and the accused
such statement can be regarded as a safe foundation for conviction.

146

 This concept strengthens the concept of chain of evidence which we have discussed before. That one
end of the chain must hang around the neck of the accused whereas the second end of the rope must
tie up with the evidence and if it is so only then conviction is possible. Hence the in light of the
aforementioned case laws it can be safely argued that a chain of corroboration must exist  before the
court

2.1.2 Nature and extent of corroboration

There is no difference in between the English law and the Pakistani law when it comes to the

nature and extent of corroboration of an approver’s evidence

. Some principles have been defined in this regard by the Pakistani Supreme Court.

147

143

(1923) AIR (Lah.) 389 (IND.)

144

(1957) 2 PLD (Lah.) 1023 (PAK.)

145

(1959) 2 PLD (Lah.) 115 (PAK)

146

 Ghafoor and others v State (1984) 2 PLD(Lah.) 441(PAK.)

147

 Ali v The state(1967)1 PLD (SC) 545 (PAK.)

33

There shall be corroboration both as to the commission of offence and the connection of accused with
that commission.

That in case where there are several accused the court should acquit those against whom no
corroboration is there.

That such corroboration shall be from evidence produced by the

 prosecution other than approver’s statement.

It has also been upheld by the Pakistani courts that it would be dangerous to specify that what kind of
evidence would make sufficient corroboration of evidence produced by an approver and that its nature
and extent shall be determined as per the circumstances of the case.

148
 Independent corroboration may not be of such strength that it by itself sustains conviction. Some other
evidence for sustaining conviction is also required.

149

2.2 Corroboration of accomplice’s evidence under The Police Rules

1934.

By now we have discussed in detail the technique of corroboration of evidence, that for what reason
corroboration is required and that in what manner it will be carried out. From here

onwards we will discuss that how an accomplice’s evidence is corroborated and r 

ecorder under Pakistani law. Our basic discussion would revolve around the manners of and precautions
which

a magistrate should keep in mind before recording any confession or an accomplice’s evidence.

Under Chapter 25 Rule 27 of the Police Rules 1934 certain precautions are provided. Magistrate and
prosecution both are under duty to consider those principles before recording any confession or any
statement produced by an accomplice. Before we go ahead it is important for

148

 Khaliq v The State(1970) 1 PLD(SC) 166 (PAK.)

149

 Ali v State (1967) 1 PLD (SC) 545 (PAK.)

34

us to understand the term prosecution. The term has been defined by the Supreme Court in and it was
held that prosecution means the whole procedure from the registration of an FIR to the final verdict of
the court. It is also highlighted that Police is an investigation agency that was formed under
Establishment of Police Act 1861. Now that we are acquainted with the concept of  prosecution and
police let us now move towards the precautions that are provided. Under Chapter 25 Rule 27 (d) of the
Police Rules 1934 the term accomplice appears. The aforementioned section relates to section 337 of
the code of criminal procedure and states that in cases where pardon cannot be granted but yet it is
important to obtain evidence of an accused against his or her accomplices, a police officer may in writing
move an application to the district magistrate to give a promise that he will not be prosecuted subject
fulfillments of conditions imposed.

150

 Under Chapter 25 Rule 27 (2) of the police rules 1934 it is stipulated that if an offender who belongs to
a gang of offenders is convicted and is now trying to bring his partners to justice the Superintendent of
police in this regard may apply to the government for suspension or cancellation of sentence under
section 401 of the code of criminal procedure but another important thing which shall be kept in
consideration is that this application shall be moved by the through the district magistrate.

151

2.2.1 Procedure of Recording

Under Chapter 25 Rule 29 of the Police Rules 1934 a number of requirements are  provided for the
situations mentioned above.

152

 On the very first count it is stipulated that no officer is allowed to tender pardon but if the statement
provided is of sufficient importance then it shall be reported to a magistrate whereas in this regard no
promise whatsoever shall be made.

150

PAK CODE. THE POLICE RULES, Chapter 25 Rule 27 (d), (1934)

151

 PAK CODE. THE POLICE RULES, Chapter 25 Rule 27 (2), (1934)

152

 PAK CODE. THE POLICE RULES, Chapter 25 Rule 29, (1934)

35

Secondly if a statement either under section 164 or under section 337 of the code of criminal  procedure
shall be recorded by a magistrate who at that time has the highest power and if otherwise stipulated
then it can be recorded by a magistrate of class 2. Magistrate himself needs to inquire about the
circumstances which led the accused for a confession whereas no police officer shall be present at the
place of recording of confession. In addition to that an approver shall remain under arrest until the
conclusion of trial. If there are more than one approvers then their statements if possible shall be
recorded by different magistrates whereas they shall not be allowed to meet each other until their
evidence is recorded in front of the Court.

2.3 Recording of statement under the code of criminal procedure 1898.

Under chapter XXIII of the code of criminal procedure namely general provisions as to inquires and trials
a detailed concept tender of pardon to an accomplice is given, sections varying from 337 to 339-A deal
with this concept. It is stipulated within these section that in any trial of whose punishment may extend
to 10 years or is punishable under section 211 of the Pakistan Penal Code or section 216-A, 369, 401,
135, 477-A, the prosecution at any stage of trial to obtain evidence may tender a pardon to a person
who directly or indirectly took part in the commission of that offence. This tender of pardon is on the
count that that he makes full and true disclosure of the circumstances as per his knowledge but this
pardon is restricted to the permission of the heirs of the victim in cases related to Qatl and hurt.

153

 It is also enshrined that once pardon is tendered reasons shall be recorded in this respect meaning that
it shall be a speaking order. A  person tendered pardon shall be examined as a witness and that if the
person is on bail he then he shall be detained till the conclusion of trial.

154

153

 PAK. CODE THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, Section 337, (1898)

154

Id..

36

It is important to highlight that it is upon the discretion of the court to tender pardon to any person
whereas if the accused has been pardoned by the prosecution or the competent authority that cannot
be challenged.

155

 
2.3.1 Difference in between statements recorded under section 164 and 337 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure 1898.

It is important for us to understand the difference in between statements recorded under section 164
and 337 of the code of criminal procedure. The earlier is known as a judicial confession.

156

 The basic difference in between both of them is that where pardon has not been offered and an
accused is making a confession that statement would be treated as a statement u/s 164 and would be
recorded as within the restrictions of that section but where pardon is offered the statement has to be

recorded as a witness under oath

157

 Though it has been upheld by the courts that it is not a vested right with the accused as if he has the
courage to confess his guilt then as per the realms of Islam why must not he face a complete trial.

158

 It has also been held that proper procedure which has been granted under section 339 &339-A if not
followed then the order will suffer great illegality.

159

 It is mentioned under section 339 & 339-A of the code of criminal procedure that if the an accomplice
has concealed some facts then that person is to be tried again but not jointly and that statement is to be
seen as an evidence against him.

155

 Mushtaq v The State (2005) Part III YLR 1728 (PAK.)

156

Darwesh and another v. The State (2014) YLR 2223 (PAK.)

157

 Zardari v The State (2005)YLR 717 (PAK.)

158

 Ahmad v The State (2003) 3 MLD 1627 (PAK.)

159
Mst. Laiba Anthony v. The State (2010) 2PCrLJ 531 (PAK.)

37

2.3.2 Can an approver be tried again as an accused or Post trial Status.

It is settled principle by now that approver forfeitures his pardon if the public prosecutor is of the view
that he has not made true and full disclosure of the circumstance.

160

 The aforesaid  principle has also been mentioned in the code of criminal procedure but in this regard
we would like to go with the principle which was upheld by the honorable High Court. It was upheld by
the court that the status of an accused was changed by no other than the prosecution itself from an
accused to a witness hence there is no legal provision in law which can change its status back from a
witness to an accused.

161

2.4 Accomplice under the perspective of Islamic Jurisprudence.

In the previous chapter we have discussed in detail about the conditions and requirements that a
witness must possess under Islamic Jurisprudence. Here we would have a detailed in look that what
status does an approver has under Islamic law as he is presented as a prosecution witness before the
court. The Federal Shariat court back in 1991 declared article 16 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order as un-
Islamic.

162

 The provision in our evidence law is also contained in the Indian Evidence Act 1872 under section 133.
The Federal Shariat Court in its judgment stated that while constructing the said article the courts have
kept in view the bar ordained in the illustration (b) of section 129. Hence they have considered it legal to
base conviction upon an un-corroborated testimony of an accused but have also termed it as dangerous.
Islamic law lays down certain qualifications and requirements for a witness. It is quite eminent that an
accomplice is nowhere near those requirements and as per the rules ordained in

160

 Bhutto v The State (1979) 1 PLD(SC) 53 (PAK.)

161
 Rasheed v The State (1970) 1PCrLJ 722 (PAK.)

162

 Hussain v Government of Pakistan (1991) 2PLD (FSC) 139 (PAK.)

38

Islaimc law he becomes a

 fasiq

163

 As per Holy Quran evidence must be given for Allah Almighty.

164

 Hence Islamic justice is something higher from formal justice of roman law or any other human law.

165

The federal Shariat Court interpreted verse number 112 of Surrah “

al-Nisa

and said that this verse refers to the concept of an approver where Allah says

“anyone who earns

a fault or a sin and throws their fault or sin on those who may not be a sinner he carries

 falsehood and a flagrant sin”.

So this means that approvers do not only carry falsehood but a flagrant sin and due to this reason their
evidence is not considered as true.

166

 The term
 Khain

 also holds immense importance in our prospective and means a person who betrays trust. Allah in the
Holy Quran has disliked such a person whereas as per the tradition of HIS EXCELLENCY THE PROPHET (

) his evidence is inadmissible.

167

 It was cited that an approver may have some enmity against the other accused and as per the tradition
of THE PROPHET (

) such evidence having enmity is inadmissible.

168

 As per Hazart Umar Bin Abdul Aziz, who is generally regarded as the fifth righteous guided caliph,
evidence must come from a person who is not an accused.

169

The only source of

corroboration that was seen by the court in this regard was as per verse no. 13 of Surrah “

 Al- Hujarat 

” where it is established that if a “

wicked person comes to you with any news ascertain

163

 Id..

164

1, THE HOLY QURAN (KANZ-UL-IMAN), Chapter 4 Verse 130, (Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi, trans, 2011)

165

 Hussain v Government of Pakistan (1991) 2PLD (FSC) 139 (PAK.)

166
 Id.

167

 Id.

168

 Id.

169

 Id.

39

the truth

”. Hence the rule enshrined under 

 article 16 finds no place under Islamic Law.

170

 In this regard the

 Muhammad Aslam v. the State

171

 can be cited as a guiding principle.

2.5 Principles of corroboration under Common law.

In this regard guidance can be taken from a number of English case laws such as

 R v.  Baskerville
172

 Davies v. DPP 

173

and others that the judge must caution the jury whenever an evidence of prosecution is from no other
than the accomplice to convict the accused but it would  be dangerous to convict him without
corroboration. It has been held by the courts time and again that caution is a mandatory requirement as
per law.

174

 So in this regard we can safely say that corroboration is the first principle. In

 R v. Baskerville

a few rules of corroboration were discussed which are now followed in a number of common law
countries even in Pakistan the courts have discussed these rules while writing down their judgments. In
these rules it was said that evidence used for corroboration must be independent, evidence must
connect the accused with the crime, evidence must implicate him though it may not narrate the whole
story as its but shall support or provide sufficient corroboration to the evidence on record, one
corroboration cannot corroborate another evidence.

2.6 Pakistani courts and Accomplices and the Test cases.

Here in this regard that how Pakistani courts have interpreted the concept of an accomplice we would
like to cite two cases.

 AbdulWaheed v. State

175

and

 Munawar Hussain

170

 Id.

171

Alam v Riyasat (1983) SCMR 1127 (PAK.)

172
R v Baskerville [1916] UKKB 658

173

Davies v DPP [1954] UKHL 378.

174

A study paper, Prepared by Law of Evidence project 1975 page 9 published by 130 AlbertStreet Ottawa
Canada K1A 0L6

175

 Waheed v the State(1995) 3 SCMR 1498 (PAK.)

44

utilize his testimony if essential for the conviction of a prime accused? In order to answer this question
jurists have evolved the theory of Independent Corroboration. Courts all over the world

have by this point of time unanimously held that an Accomplice’s evidence requires a mandatory

corroboration form an independent source as he is a man of doubtful character.

184

 This rule which has been developed after decades of consideration and deliberation implies that the
evidence of an approver/accomplice is infested with an inherent defect. However as we all know that
law has always preferred that matters be decided on merits rather than be defeated on technicalities.

185

 Therefore if the testimony of an approver is otherwise confidence inspiring, the court ought to provide
the prosecution with an opportunity to cure the defect lying in its evidence. This defect as discussed
earlier can only be cured if the evidence provided by the approver is corroborated by an independent
mean which is absolutely distinguishable fromthe approver. This check or safeguard which has been
undetectably associated with

the approver’s

evidence is essential to ensure the fact that the prosecution is not given a tool by which it can lure
accomplices into framing their partners based on a promise of lenience by the prosecution. This
safeguard has been incorporated into the codified law by many countries and states such as in the
California Penal Code
186

 and where that is not the case and the legislature has failed on its  part the judicature has stepped in
and under the principal of precedence has made it mandatory upon judges

to disbelief the approver’s evidence if void of an independent corroboration. In fact

the Supreme Court of Illinois in People v. Montgomery

187

 has went onto the extent of ruling that an accomplice may not corroborate the evidence of another
accomplice as same would violate

184

State v. Abdus Sattar 1985 (NLR) Cr. 254 (PAK.)

185

Tidmarsh, J. (2009). Resolving Cases on the Merits. Denv. UL Rev., 87, 407.

186

CAL. (Penal) Code. § 1111 (1872).

187

 The People v. Montgomery - 268 N.E.2d 695, 47 Ill. 2d 510

45

the spirit of the independent corroboration law. In another case of People v. Szeto the Supreme

Court of California ruled that each and every inch of the accomplice’s evidence needs to be

independently corroborated by an dependent source like an unbroken chain and in case a defect

arises in this strength of the chain at any joint it’s blow will be suffered by the prosecution.

188

 In view of the foregoing discussion it is clear that an Approver/Accomplice is an imperfect witness and
his perfecti

on can only be managed by an independent source’s

corroboration, in the absence of the latter the former is futile and inefficacious in terms of law. Only in
this manner will the binding maxim of

 Actus Curiae NeminemGravabit 

i.e. The act of the Court shall prejudice no one stand discharged by the court.

188

 Extent of Corroboration Required. People v. Szeto (1981) 29 Cal.3d 20, 27[171 Cal.Rptr. 652, 623 P.2d
213]

46

Recommendations and Conclusion

In view of what has been discussed in the foregoing paras one is forced to see that independent
corroboration is necessarywhen ever an accomplice put forwards his evidence  before the court as a
prosecution witness. It has been now established after discussing in depth different legal regimes that
some legal regimes insist upon the necessity of caution and independent corroboration whereas some
legal regimes such as the Islamic criminal legal system totally reject it. It is therefore a dire need of the
time that certain recommendations shall be given in regards to the existing evidence law of Pakistan i:e
The Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order 1984.

The term independent corroboration be added in the existing article of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order
1984.

In view of what has been discussed above it is the dire need of the time that the term independent
corroboration be added within the Qanoon e Shahadat Order. It is vital to add  because as we have
discussed above that the courts in Pakistan have considered it safe to convict an accused on the sole
testimony of an accused whereas on the in the other legal regimes it has not only been termed as
dangerous but some legal regimes have totally and wholly rejected this concept. It would be on the safer
side to add this term within the legal spectrum because conviction then would be on the safer side. In
this the cardinal principle of criminal law will also  prevail which states that accused is the blue eyed
child of the court.

189

The duty is upon no other than the investigation authority to fetch out evidence so that the truth comes
out and if police is the investigative agency then it is pertinent to mention that as per the Police Rules
1934 an

189
Hussain v. The State(1999) 2 PLD(SC) 504 (PAK.)

47

investigation officer is duty bound to bring out the real facts of the case rather than investigating on
foundries which shall incriminate the accused. It is also pertinent to mention that benefit of doubt
always extends towards the accused even if the act stipulates otherwise.

190

 In this regard another principle of law can also be citied where it is held that 99 criminals may roam free
but one innocent shall not be hanged which is sadly the state of affairs within our country. Hence if
convictions are carried out on the sole testimony of an accused then it would not only be dangerous but
would indeed defeat the ends of Justice by all means.

Existing article be brought within the Ambit of Quran and Sunnah as per article 227 of the Constitution
of Pakistan.

In this regard detailed discussion has been done in the aforementioned paragraphs. Under article 227 of
the Constitution of Pakistan it is mandatory upon the state to bring all exsisting laws within the ambit of
Injunction provided in the Holy Qurran and Sunnah of the PROPHET. Judiciary is organ through which
laws enacted by the legislature are interpreted, though interpretation of statute may vary from time to
time. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has also

termed itself as “

Uolel Amar 

 means the one whom is to be followed. A detailed discussion by the federal shariat court has been
discussed already where the court has termed it as a

 Khyan

 one who betrays trust. They have also made the verse of the Holy Quran a part of their judgment where
it is stipulated that if information is brought to you by a

 Khayn

 then you must check it from other sources. They have not declared the article under discussion
repugnant to Islam whereas they have also declared sections varying from 337-339-A of the code of
criminal  procedure repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam.
190

 Zaman v. The State (1999) 2 PLJ(SC) 1852 (PAK.)

48

In this regard it would be better to inculcate the term independent corroboration within the statute
under article 16 because as per jurisprudence an article overrides an illustration. It is also pertinent to
mention here that by doing so it would come much close our within the out ambit of the Islamic criminal
law and by doing so principles of Islamic law which has been time and again held by the Supreme Court
of Pakistan as the supreme law will be safeguarded.

Conclusion

In light of what has been discussed in detail in the aforementioned discussion some things

can be safely concluded. If we give a bird’s eye of what has been discussed then on the very first

count we can say that an accomplice is made and pardon is tender to him due to lack of evidence with
the prosecution. It can be described in a nut shell that due to this tender of pardon an accomplice put
forwards his version before the court. That due to this reason his testimony  before the court as a
prosecution witness is tainted. That due to this very reason he has been termed as a selfish man and a
moral wretch who has betrayed his former fellows. It is also said that gain of pardon lead him to go for
such testimony. Hence it can be safely said that if no independent corroboration of evidence is there
with his evidence before the court of law then it would be not only be dangerous but would by all means
defeat the ends of justice. Hence

Independent corroboration with an approver’s deposition is necessary i

n criminal law.

49

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARTICLES

 
Medard r rewlamira, Corroboration of Accomplice evidence in Swaziland: Some thoughts on Judicial
Interpretations and their implications, 36(1) J. AF. L. (1992).

G H, Evidence: Corroboration of testimony of an accomplice 7(4) CA. L. REV. (1919.)

Mamman Lawan, Ibrahim & Shaheen Sardar, An Introduction to Islamic Criminal Justice System,HIGH.
EDU ACAD. UK. (2011.)

Abubakar & adamu , Islamic law and practice and procedure in Nigerian courts, PUB. Malthouse press
LTD. Lagos

Law relating to witness: Historical Development, Page 13

Before the circuit court of the United States, Holden at Boston,

The Trial of J W, F  Frederick, Etc on an Indictment for Murder on the High Seas;

 (1 edn, BOSTON: Russell and Gardner 1819) 36

Shahbaz Ahmed Cheema, Corroborating evidence in Pakistan, A Mechanism to fill relaiablityvaccum,

SSRN.

BOOKS


 

1, THE HOLY QURAN (KANZ-UL-IMAN), (2011) (Translator Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi)

M MOMIR, A TEXT BOOK ON EVIDENCE

(1

st

 ed. 2012)

50


J.D. NEWTON AND GLANVILLE WILLIAMS ,

THE MODERN LAW REVIEW 

 (1, Vol 17 edn, Wiley 1954) 37

JOHN AUSTIN, THE PROVINCE OF JURISPURDENCE DETERMIND (1

st

 ed.1832).

SYDNEY BECKMAN, SUSAN CRUMP & FRED GALVES, EVIDENCE A CONTEMPORARY APPROACH, WEST.
PUB. Co.397

J. D. NEWTON AND GLANVILLE WILLIAMS , THE MODERN LAW REVIEW (17

TH

 ed. 1954).

MUHAMMAD IQBAL, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ISLAM, SUPS.CA. 63 (2012.)

 
KELSON, PURE THEORY OF LAW, LAW BOOK EXCHANGE LTD. (2005)

JOHN W. SALMOND, JURISPRUDENCE, STEVENS AND HAYNES, LONDON,. (1902)

CASES

Govt. Of Balochistan through additional Chief secretary v. AzizullahMemon and others (1993) 1 PLD (SC)
341 (PAK.)

Bhutto v the State (1979) 1 PLD (SC) 741 (PAK.)

Faisal v The State (2007) 3 PLD (KAR.) 544

Mst. Rasoolain Bibi v. State (2011) 3 P.L.J (C.R.C) 8 (PAK.)

(2009) SCMR 23 (PAK.)

Hussain v. The State (1993) 2 SCMR 785



(1977) CriLJ 1206 (IND.)

(1954) I A.E.R 507

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

About Author

Rizwan Ali

1.0

Bahria University, Islamabad-Pakistan

Graduate Student
Papers

Views

161

Followers

  Follow

  Following

Related Papers

DYING DECLARATION AND ITS CORROBORATION

Chief Editor

 • 

3,394 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Dying Declaration and its Corroboration in Pakistan and India: An Analytical Study of Case Law
Iqra malik

 • 

132 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

ADMISSIBILITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF CONFESSION: CONFLICTS AND HARMONY BETWEEN RULES
OF LAW AND RULES OF PRUDENCE IN BANGLADESH, INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Shanjida Efat and Anisuzzaman Sobuj

 • 

1,111 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
Good Governance in Action: Pakistani Muslim Law on Human Rights and Gender-Equality

Ihsan Yilmaz

 • 

1,294 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

PREVAILING CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN PAKISTAN (ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM

liaqat Ali

 • 

244 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
The Jurisprudential Implications of Corroboration under the Nigerian Evidence Law and Practice

Ikenga Oraegbunam

 • 

2,749 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Solving the Jigsaw Puzzle: A Critical Analysis of the Evidence of an Accused Implicating a Co-accused
under the Nigerian Law of Evidence

Nuel Oji

 • 

111 Views

Download

More Options
Save to Library

Report

evidence

Neeni Aliza

 • 

49 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Law of Information to the Police and Their Powers to Investigate

Munir Mughal

 • 

899 Views

Download
More Options

Save to Library

Report

Self defence

Ashraf Ali Deptt of Law

 • 

2,099 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Terrorism Prosecution in Pakistan

Syed Manzar A Zaidi

 • 

637 Views
Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

How does the Pakistani legal system handle honour killings? A hard balance between Islamic and
Common Law.

Arhum tariq butt

 • 

428 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Law of Evidence in Pakistan

zafar kalanauri
 • 

1,865 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Access to Justice for Survivors of Sexual Assault

Sohail A Warraich

 • 

114 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

" ARTICLE ON CORRUPTION AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES HOW AN ACCUSED IS RELEASED FROM JAIL " "
BAIL/RELEASE IN ANTI CORRUPTION CASES IN THE LIGHT OF National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of
1999
khurram shahzad

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Precedent in Islamic Law with Special Reference to the Federal Shariat Court and the Legal System in
Pakistan

Muhammad Munir

 • 

31 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT PANAJI, GOA MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE
sumit pallav

 • 

80 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

perjury

Gautam Singla

 • 

94 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
How Much Rape is Rape? Understanding Normative Assumptions within Rape Victimology in Pakistan

Sarah Zaman and Maliha Zia

 • 

53 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Sughran Bibi Case and its impact on the Criminal Justice System of Pakistan

Kamran Adil

 • 

175 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
About Author

Rizwan Ali

1.0

Bahria University, Islamabad-Pakistan

Graduate Student

Papers

Views

161

Followers

  Follow

  Following

Related Papers

DYING DECLARATION AND ITS CORROBORATION

Chief Editor

 • 

3,394 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Dying Declaration and its Corroboration in Pakistan and India: An Analytical Study of Case Law

Iqra malik

 • 

132 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
ADMISSIBILITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF CONFESSION: CONFLICTS AND HARMONY BETWEEN RULES
OF LAW AND RULES OF PRUDENCE IN BANGLADESH, INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Shanjida Efat and Anisuzzaman Sobuj

 • 

1,111 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Good Governance in Action: Pakistani Muslim Law on Human Rights and Gender-Equality

Ihsan Yilmaz

 • 

1,294 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
PREVAILING CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN PAKISTAN (ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM

liaqat Ali

 • 

244 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

The Jurisprudential Implications of Corroboration under the Nigerian Evidence Law and Practice

Ikenga Oraegbunam

 • 

2,749 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library
Report

Solving the Jigsaw Puzzle: A Critical Analysis of the Evidence of an Accused Implicating a Co-accused
under the Nigerian Law of Evidence

Nuel Oji

 • 

111 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

evidence

Neeni Aliza

 • 

49 Views

Download
More Options

Save to Library

Report

Law of Information to the Police and Their Powers to Investigate

Munir Mughal

 • 

899 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Self defence

Ashraf Ali Deptt of Law

 • 

2,099 Views
Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Terrorism Prosecution in Pakistan

Syed Manzar A Zaidi

 • 

637 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

How does the Pakistani legal system handle honour killings? A hard balance between Islamic and
Common Law.

Arhum tariq butt

 • 

428 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Law of Evidence in Pakistan

zafar kalanauri

 • 

1,865 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Access to Justice for Survivors of Sexual Assault

Sohail A Warraich

 • 

114 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

" ARTICLE ON CORRUPTION AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES HOW AN ACCUSED IS RELEASED FROM JAIL " "
BAIL/RELEASE IN ANTI CORRUPTION CASES IN THE LIGHT OF National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of
1999

khurram shahzad

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Precedent in Islamic Law with Special Reference to the Federal Shariat Court and the Legal System in
Pakistan
Muhammad Munir

 • 

31 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT PANAJI, GOA MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

sumit pallav

 • 

80 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
perjury

Gautam Singla

 • 

94 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

How Much Rape is Rape? Understanding Normative Assumptions within Rape Victimology in Pakistan

Sarah Zaman and Maliha Zia

 • 

53 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report
Sughran Bibi Case and its impact on the Criminal Justice System of Pakistan

Kamran Adil

 • 

175 Views

Download

More Options

Save to Library

Report

Download file

About

Press

Blog

People

Papers

Job Board

Advertise
 We're Hiring!

 Help Center

Terms

Privacy

Copyright

Academia ©2019

of 65