Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b), 34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----Ss. 302(b) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Confessional statement, recording of---Infirmities---Accusedpetitioner was charged for committing murder of his wife, daughter and son by administering poison---Record revealed that though the accused had made a confessional statement on 31.12.2020 before the concerned Magistrate but subsequently retracted from it by stating that the police had arrested his father and other ladies and was maltreating them, so in order to save them from the clutches of the police he made the said confessional statement---According to accused, he was given an assurance by the police that if he made a confessional statement before the concerned Magistrate, the other persons implicated in the case of killing the three persons would be let off by the police---In the accused's statement under Section 342, Cr.P.C., recorded by the Trial Court, while answering question No.5, the accused categorically stated that the confessional statement recorded on 31.12.2020 was under duress---Accused further explained, by answering question No.10, that he was present at a village to look after his land, where he was informed that his wife and two children had passed away---Thereafter, accused went to his home where the police arrested him---Deposition of Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the accused's confessional statement, revealed that the column of length of time of the confessional statement was left blank by him and further that he had not obtained the thumb impression of the accused on the first page of the alleged confessional statement---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt---Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and accused was acquitted of the charge.

(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Medical evidence not supporting the prosecution case---Accused-petitioner was charged for committing murder of his wife, daughter and son by administering poison---Medical Officers had categorically stated that Chemical Examiner's report with regard to intoxication and poisoning of the three deceased persons returned as negative---Record transpired that there was no evidence of strangulation on the bodies of the deceased persons---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt---Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and accused was acquitted of the charge.