Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 987 2010 SLD 987 2010 PLJ 848
Lahore High Court
Crl. Appeal No. 156 of 2004 & M.R. No. 169 of 2004, hearing Date : 03.03.2010.
MUHAMMAD ANWAR BHAUR, JUSTICE, MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE
Mr. Shoaib Zafar, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Muhammad Zafar Khan, DPG for State. Mr. Muhammad Taqi Khan, Advocate for Complainant.

ATIF ABAIDULLAH

VS

STATE

Law:

Section:

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 302(b)--Conviction & sentence recorded against appellant by trial Court--Challenge to----Appellant was convicted solely on the basis of his confessional statement made before trial Court--No prosecution evidence whatsoever was recorded--Question of--Legality of impugned --Held: As capital punishment was likely to be awarded to appellant solely for the reason that the appellant had admitted his guilt, therefore, the trial Court should have recorded the prosecution evidence, but it failed--Trial judge acted in an undue haste and proceeded to record warranting death penalty in a cursory and careless manner, rather, over zealous manner--Mandate of sub-section (b) of Section 376 Cr.P.C., the impugned is termed as no in the eye of law, the same is set-aside and the case is remanded back to the District & Sessions Judge. 2006 MLD 685, 2000 PCr.LJ 837 & PLD 1984 Lah. 434, ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.- This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 156/04 (Atif Abaidullah vs. The State) and Murder Reference No. 169/04 sent by the learned trial Court for confirmation or otherwise of the sentence of death awarded to the appellant, as they arise out of the same judgment dated 22.1.2004 passed by Rao Sultan Ali Tahir, Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, whereby, appellant was convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and sentenced to death with a further direction to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- as provided under Section 544-A Cr.P.C. to the legal heirs of the deceased. 2. As the appellant was convicted solely on the basis of his confessional statement made before the learned trial Court after framing of charge for the murder of Ali Hassan and no prosecution evidence whatsoever was recorded by the learned trial Court, therefore, before proceeding further with the case, this Court asked learned counsel for both the parties to address the Court qua legality or otherwise of the impugned judgment of conviction. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the conviction recorded by the learned trial Court, against the appellant solely on the basis of confession of the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492