There is no legal impediment to base conviction on the deposition of a single witness who is found to be truthful and his/her acclaimed presence at the spot is proved beyond doubt.

 2022 MLD 1848

Presence of a witness, who is an inmate of the house wherein crime scene of a murder case is situated, is to be accepted in the absence of some convincing material to the contrary brought on record by the defence. More importantly, when the witness is not having some axe to grind with the assailant.

In the absence of some exceptional circumstances put forth by the defence, the injuries on the person of a witness are generally considered stamp of his/her presence at the spot of murder incident.

There is no legal impediment to base conviction on the deposition of a single witness who is found to be truthful and his/her acclaimed presence at the spot is proved beyond doubt. For raising superstructure of conviction, instead of quantity of evidence produced is to be looked upon the quality and intrinsic worth of evidence.

A plain reading of 302(b) PPC unfolds that offence of Qatl-i-Amd is made punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It can well be gathered from section 302(b) PPC as it is structured and from the legislative intent of the legislature that imprisonment for life is an alternate sentence which is to be awarded by the court having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. In other words, this is upto the court to decide that in which case a murderer is to be punished with death and in what kind of cases the imprisonment of life is to be awarded. In this regard, the view of the Apex Court is almost consistent that if the projected motive is not proved beyond scintilla of any doubt then the alternate sentence of imprisonment of life provided under section 302(b) PPC is to be awarded.