Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2611 2018 SLD 2611 2018 PCRLJ 1465
Peshawar High Court
Cr. A.s Nos. 131-M and Cr. Rev. No. 30-M of 2015, decision & hearing Dated: 23-10-2017.
MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, JUSTICE ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM, JUSTICE
RESPONDENT(S): STATE THROUGH ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE-GENERAL, Petitioner(s) by: Hazrat Rehman (in Cr. A. No. 131-M of 2015).
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Rahim Shah, Assistant Advocate-General (in both cases). Saeed Ahmad for the Complainant/
Respondent/Peti

ZAHIR RAHMAN AND ANOTHER

VS

STATE THROUGH ADDITIONAL ADVOCATEGENERAL,

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302(c)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 164

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence--- Retracted Judicial confession---Scope---In the present case, there was no eyewitness of the occurrence and complainant charged unknown accused for the murder of his brother, by lodging FIR on 20.9.2013---Complainant and father of the deceased recorded their statements under S. 164, Cr.P.C. wherein, they charged the accused for the murder of the deceased---Accused contended that Trial Court convicted him on the basis of his confessional statement---Accused further contended that he made no confession because at the time of recording his statement, he was juvenile and was afforded no opportunity of consultation with his parents/guardian or a counsel before recording his statement, therefore, the said statement had no evidentiary value---Validity---Admittedly, the occurrence was an unseen incident and the prosecution case hinged on confessional statement of the accused---Record showed that the accused was arrested on 2.10.2013 and produced before the Judicial Magistrate on 3.10.2013---Accused, being a minor, was to be provided opportunity of counseling either with his guardian or with a lawyer and his confession was recorded in presence of Naib Court who was in uniform at that time---Accused being juvenile should have been provided counselling facility of guardian or a lawyer of his choice by the Judicial Magistrate before recording his confession---Judicial Magistrate afforded him no opportunity to be alone for thinking---Accused had been charged with the offence entailing capital punishment and keeping in view the intensity of the charge and minority of the accused, the Judicial Magistrate ought to be extra-cautious while recording his confession as the same could be used for his conviction in trial---Judicial Magistrate had admitted during his cross-examination that the accused did not disclose any reason for recording his confessional statement--- Confessional statement of the accused did not disclose as to whether the same was made voluntarily or otherwise---Possibility of the accused, being tutored or tortured by the local…
🔒
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