Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2624 2019 SLD 2624 2019 YLR 2213
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 19-M of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 03-12-2018.
MUHAMMAD GHAZANFAR KHAN, JUSTICE SYED ARSHAD ALI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Aftab Alam Yasir and Salman Ijaz
Respondent(s) by: Sahibzada Baha-ud-Din

MUHAMMAD PARVAIZ

VS

THE STATE THROUGH ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, KPK AND ANOTHER

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 365-B,494,496A,496-B

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 157(1),164,382B

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 43

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 365-B---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 43---Kidnapping to compel for marriage---Appreciation of evidence---Retracted confession---Effect---Call Data Record (CDR), procurement of---Accused was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life by Trial court for kidnapping and compelling sister/ abductee of complainant for illegal marriage---None of the prosecution witnesses had witnessed occurrence in person---No one had come forward as witness to have seen accused abducting/ inducing co-accused abductee for purpose of illegal marriage---Testimony of witnesses was based on hearsay evidence which could not be made basis for conviction of accused---Prosecution was bound to have received CDR with an endorsement of cellular company concerned, having stamp and signature thereupon of concerned authorized officer---While taking into possession CDR, through a recovery memo, at least a concerned person should have been associated from cellular company to independently prove recovery---Prosecution could have at least recorded statement of representative of cellular company to effect issuance and receipt of CDR but no such evidence was collected---Confession made by co-accused/abductee was not only later on retracted but from such confession it appeared that she with her own sweet will went to house of accused---Elements of force, pressure and coercion on behalf of accused were missing in confession---Co-accused/abductee stated in her confession that she was divorced by her husband some years back therefore, she had contracted marriage with the accused---High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded by Trial Court as prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Abdul Khaliq v. The State 1996 SCMR 1553 and Imran alias Dullay and another v. The State and others 2015 SCMR 155 ref. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 43---Confession in jointly convicted accused---Prerequisite---Retracted confessional statement by one accused cannot be used against other accused---Confession of accused is circumstantial evidence against co-accused under Art. 43 of…
🔒
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