Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----------Ss. 302(b), 394, 396 & 34-----Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(4)-----Qatl-i-amd, voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery, dacoity with murder, common intention, haraabah-----Appreciation of evidence-----Prosecution witness, who knew accused had identified accused in the court-----Accused offered to make a confessional statement before Magistrate-----Magistrate, satisfied himself that confession was made by accused voluntarily, without any coercion-----Magistrate was thoroughly cross-examined, but nothing notable, in favour of accused was brought on record-----Accused was given chance to think; and after fulfilling the requirements of Ss.164 & 364, Cr.P.C., the Magistrate recorded the confessional statement of accused-----Recovery of stolen car and the pistol from accused, just few hours after the occurrence, provided corroboration to the confessional statement-----Name of accused, along with number of stolen vehicle, was duly mentioned in the FIR-----Statements of prosecution witnesses, had fully supported the prosecution case-----Non-availability of Forensic Science Laboratory's report, was a circumstance, which would go against the prosecution, but in presence of other incriminating evidence and material, it would not affect the prosecution case-----Accused could not produce any defence witness, or documents in proof of his stance of false involvement due to land dispute-----Case against accused had been built on the basis of circumstantial evidence; evidence of last seen of the deceased with accused; evidence regarding the recovery of stolen car, medical evidence, confirming the time of occurrence, the weapon of offence; and cause of death-----Prosecution had also relied upon the retracted judicial confessional statement-----Accused having found solely responsible for committing robbery and murder, he could not be convicted under S.396, P.P.C.; because for conviction under S.396, P.P.C., minimum five accused persons were necessary-----Conviction of accused, under S.396, P.P.C., was converted into one under S.394, P.P.C., but his sentence of life imprisonment…