Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 3056 2022 SLD 3056 2022 YLR 1054
Sindh High Court
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 39, 40, 41 of2010 and Confirmation Case No. 10 of 2010, decided on 16thDecember, 2019.*
MOHAMMAD KARIM KHAN AGHA AND ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, JJ
Mushtaq Ahmed for Appellants (in Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeal No. 39 of 2010).Salahuddin Khan Gandapur and Sabir Shah for Appellants (in Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeal No. 40 of 2010).Muhammad Akbar Khan and Ms. Fareeda Usmani for App

MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ QURESHI and others

VS

The STATE

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7(a)

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

Section: 40,22

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 364

(a) Criminal trial--- ----Judicial confession--- Retracted---Delay in recording confession---Effect---Retracted confession before Magistrate can be made basis of conviction in a capital case however it must be: (a) voluntary i.e. without threat or inducement and (b) its object must be to state the truth; assistance for which can be ascertained from (i) whether the confession appears truthful within the context of prosecution case and (ii) whether there is any other evidence on record which tends to corroborate truthfulness of the confession and (c) only minor irregularities regarding the rules concerning the recording of judicial confessions can be permitted as determined on a case to case basis, the main criteria being that such irregularities have not adversely affected the voluntariness or truthfulness of the confession---Slight delay in recording the confession after arrest of accused does not affect its legality and ability of Court to rely on the same. Nazeer alias Wazeer v. The State PLD 2007 SC 202; Manjeet Singh v. The State PLD 2006 SC 30; Khan Muhammad and others v. The State 1999 SCMR 1818; Majeed v. The State 2010 SCMR 55 and Bahadur v. State PLD 1996 SC 336 rel. (b) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----S. 7(a)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 40---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 364---Terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Judicial confession, retracting of---Disclosure of accused---Sectarian violence---Recovery on pointing of accused---Accused persons were alleged to have launched two terrorist attacks on a religious leader, in which many persons lost their lives due to suicidal bomb blast---No cogent evidence was available on record that the confessions were not made voluntarily i.e. by threat or inducement---Object of confessions was to tell the truth as it was to fit in with prosecution case and to corroborate other evidence on record---Though there were some irregularities in recording of confessions by Judicial Magistrate before whom the same were recorded but such irregularities had neither affected voluntariness nor truthfulness of the confessions---Such confessions were admissible and could form basis of convicting…
🔒
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