Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention--- Appreciation of evidence---Delay about four days in lodging FIR---Effect---Inordinate and unexplained delay in reporting the matter to police for lodging FIR cast serious doubt about the veracity of prosecution story---Conviction and sentence recorded against accused were set-aside accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 109 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 382-B & 544-A---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that accused committed murder of husband of complainant on the instance of co-accused---Motive not established---Ocular account was in contradiction with medical evidence---Trial Court, acquitted co-accused by giving benefit of doubt, convicted present accused under S. 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment along with award of compensation to legal heirs of deceased on the basis of same evidence---No appeal was filed against the acquittal of co-accused---No direct evidence against the accused was available which could justify his conviction on a capital charge---Recovery was effected after sixteen days of the occurrence---Chemical Examiner report was prepared after twenty one days of the recovery---Confession of accused about the murder of deceased before co-accused, overheard by the complainant, which was extra-judicial confession, as such carried no weight---Prosecution had failed to prove its case against accused beyond any reasonable doubt---All such factors made the case of prosecution doubtful---High Court, setting aside conviction and sentence, acquitted accused---Appeal was accepted in circumstances. Muhammad Jamil v. Muhammad Akram and others 2009 SCMR 120; Ata Muhammad and another v. The State 1995 SCMR 599 and Ayub Masih v. The State PLD 2002 SC 1048 rel. (c) Confession--- ----Extra-judicial confession---Evidentiary value---Extra-judicial confession was of weak type of evidence on the basis of which conviction on capital charge could not be recorded. Sajid Mumtaz and others v. Basharat and others 2006 SCMR 231; Tahir Javed v. The State 2009 SCMR 166; Ziaul…