Eye witnesses to their extent yet it is settled by now that the maxim ‘falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ has no universal application and it is bounden duty of the court to sift the grain from the chaff

18. Although, Ayyub Khan son of Arsal Khan, Sharif Khan, Rehmatullah and Asmatullah co-accused have been acquitted by the trial court through the impugned judgment by disbelieving the evidence of above mentioned eye witnesses to their extent yet it is settled by now that the maxim ‘falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ has no universal application and it is bounden duty of the court to sift the grain from the chaff. Reliance is placed on case Elahi Bakhsh Vs. Rabnawaz and another (2002 SCMR 1842) in which Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has observed at page 1847 as under: -

 “We have also adverted to the contention of Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court that on the basis of same evidence Rabnawaz (petitioner) could not have been convicted but it has been ignored while raising the said contention that the case of acquitted accused is absolutely on a different and distinct footing as no specific role whatsoever was assigned to them which has been attributed to Rabnawaz (petitioner) in a categoric manner. In such an eventuality the credibility of “Ellahi Bukhsh PW-7 and Abdur Razzaq PW-10 could not be said to have been shattered due to the said acquittal. It is well settled by now that the maxim ‘falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ has no universal application and it is bounden duty of the court to sift the grain from the chaff. In this regard reference can be made to Khairu. State (1981 SCMR 1136). A thorough scrutiny of the entire evidence would reveal that the statements of prosecution witnesses are consistent, confidence inspiring and in consonance with the probability in the case and fitted in with other evidence and circumstances of the case and being worthy of credence could not have been brushed aside. The prosecution, in our considered opinion has substantiated the allegation beyond shadow of doubt and accordingly Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal (108/2001) being devoid of merit is dismissed”. 

Part of Judgment

LAHORE HIGH COURT RAWALPINDI BENCH, RAWALPINDI

Murder Reference
14-12

2015 LHC 6748