ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE
There are two dying declarations made by deceased Hatem Ali. The second dying declaration being nearer to death, the High Court Division believed the same and acted on it. Two eye-witnesses deposed that the appellants had inflicted fatal injuries on the person of the victim but the High Court Division placed no reliance on these witnesses. There can be no justification for disbelieving these witnesses merely on the ground that they were not disinterested witnesses, although the defence failed to shaken in any way their credibility in cross-examination. Evidence Act, 1872, Section-32(1)
SamadSikdar
alias SomedSikder Vs. The State, 17BLD (AD) 239
Assessment
of evidence
When
the guilt of the accused is proved by the consistent and corroborative evidence
of a number of eye-witnesses and their evidence is found to be unblemished,
the medical certificate proved by a Doctor appearing for the prosecution
showing that during the relevant time the accused was admitted in the Rajshahi
Medical College Hospital as an in- door patient cannot be relied upon because
of the dubious nature of the certificate. Shaheen and another Vs. The State,
17BLD(AD)282
Assessment
of evidence
When
the prosecution fails to examine the natural, probable and disinterested witnesses from the vicinity of the place of occurrence and offers no
satisfactory explanation, adverse presumption under section 114(g) of the
Evidence Act must be drawn against the prosecution. Tomezuddin Biswas Kalu and
an- other Vs. The State, 17BLD (HCD)174 Ref: 40 DLR 348; 11 BLD (1991)231-Cited
Assessment
of evidence
If
the prosecution withholds material witnesses named in the chargesheet and fails
to examine natural and probable witnesses from the neighbourhood without any
plausi- ble explanation an adverse presumption un- der section 114 (g) of the
Evidence Act, should be drawn against the prosecution. Momin alias Md. Mominul
Hug Vs. The State, 16 BLD (HCD) 246
Assessment
of evidence
When
the occurrence took place in broad day light on a busy pathway and the prosecution failed to examine any natural and probable witness from the
neighbourhood and of- fered no explanation for that, an adverse presumption
under section 114(g) of the Evidence Act is to be drawn against the prosecution.
Md. Alamgir Hossain alias Alamgir Hossain Vs. The State, 16 BLD (HCD) 270
Assessment
of Evidence
Statement
of a victim girl in custody of the accused
When
a young girl lives with the accused after the alleged abduction she is
generally prone to undue influence which is brought to bear upon her by the
accused aiming at encountering the case of the lawful guardian. The statement
of the victim girl under such circumstances should be received with reservations. The Court should give more importance to the words of the parents to
those of a wayward daughter who is currently enamoured with romanticism. Badiur
Rahman Chowdhury Vs. Nazrul Islam and another, 16BLD(AD)263
Assessment
of evidence
When
the prosecution withholds material. witnesses like the doctor who held the
post-mortem examination, the Investigation Officer and other charge-sheeted
witnesses with- out satisfactory explanations, the Court has to draw an adverse
presumption against the prosecution under section 114 (g) of the Evidence Act. Munsurul
Hossain Vs. The State, 16 BLD(HCD)326 Ref: 36 DLR 333; 28DL R 128 Cited
Assessment
of evidence
Evidence
False in part may not be false in its entirety
In
our country witnesses have a tendency to exaggerate, embroider and falsely
implicate persons in addition to the real offenders. But even then the Court
is to scan the entire evidence so as to come to a correct decision as to which
part of the evidence is to be accepted and which part to be rejected. False-
hood in one part of the evidence does not necessarily mean falsehood in its
entirety. Masum and others Vs. The State, 16 BLD(HCD)151
Assessment
of witness
A
witness for the prosecution does not become partisan per se nor an eye-witness
can be disregarded merely because he has come to support the prosecution party.
It is necessary to consider the whole evidence and then to assess the worth of
the witnesses as a whole. The State Vs. Abdul Khaleque alias Abdul
Khaleq Howlader, 17BLD(AD) 188
In a review matter the Appellate Division cannot re-assess the evidence afresh and re-hear the matter.
While finding the petitioner guilty of the charge, this court thoroughly assessed the evidence and acquitted him of the first part of the charge not on the ground that those witnesses are not reliable but on other ground. Mr. Khandaker Mahbub Hossain has argued points which were considered and discussed by this court. A decision on those points require reassessment of the evidence on record and there is no scope to reassess the evidence. The Appellate Division has already assessed the evidence of those witnesses, and therefore, the points raised by the learned counsel is beyond the pale of review.
একটি পুনর্বিবেচনা বিষয়ে আপিল বিভাগ নতুন করে প্রমাণ পুনঃমূল্যায়ন করতে এবং বিষয়টি পুনরায় শুনতে পারে না।
পিটিশনকারীকে অভিযোগে দোষী সাব্যস্ত করার সময়, এই আদালত প্রমাণগুলি পুঙ্খানুপুঙ্খভাবে মূল্যায়ন করেছে এবং তাকে অভিযোগের প্রথম অংশ থেকে খালাস দিয়েছে, এই ভিত্তিতে নয় যে সেই সাক্ষীরা অবিশ্বাসযোগ্য, বরং অন্যান্য ভিত্তিতে। মিঃ খন্দকার মাহবুব হোসেন এমন বিষয়গুলি উত্থাপন করেছেন যা এই আদালত দ্বারা বিবেচিত ও আলোচিত হয়েছে। সেই বিষয়গুলিতে সিদ্ধান্ত নেওয়ার জন্য রেকর্ডে থাকা প্রমাণ পুনঃমূল্যায়নের প্রয়োজন হয় এবং প্রমাণ পুনঃমূল্যায়নের কোন সুযোগ নেই। আপিল বিভাগ ইতিমধ্যেই সেই সাক্ষীদের প্রমাণ মূল্যায়ন করেছে, এবং তাই, বিজ্ঞ আইনজীবী দ্বারা উত্থাপিত বিষয়গুলি পুনর্বিবেচনার পরিধির বাইরে।
Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee -Vs.- The Chief Prosecution (ICT) (Criminal) 16 ALR (AD) 206-208
