Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302

Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 32, 8

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 164, 162, 172

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302-Witness-Prosecution not required to examine every possible witness. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302-Dying declaration--Close scrutiny of, like that of interested witnesses absolutely necessary-Difficult to lay down rigid rule that person injured and under apprehension of death would depose nothing but truth-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 32. Tawaib Khan v. State P L D 1970 S C 13 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302-Absconding of accused-Accused, a coolie, arrested after the incident from a town other than where he worked-Would not lead to conclusion that he had tried to abscond, particularly where he was not questioned on this aspect of the case-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 8, illus. (i). (d) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) Ss. 164, 162 & 172-Confession-Accused retracting his judicial confession alleging in his statement under S. 342, Cr. P. C. that confession was a reproduction word by word of his statement made to Police Allegations if found to be true, Court would be reluctant to hold confession genuine and voluntary-Accused, in circumstance, entitled to cross-examine both the S. H. O. and the Magistrate recording con fession-Such cross-examination not barred by S. 162, Cr. P. C. Section 162, Cr: P. C. to be read with S. 172, Cr. P. C. and S. 159, Evidence Act, 1872-Confession before Police could not be proved against accused but it could be used by accused in his favour=History and construction of S. 162, Cr. P. C. Evidence Act (I of 1872), Ss. 25 & 159-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302. In a murder case, the basis of conviction of accused was his retracted judicial confession. The accused in his statement under section 342, Cr. P. C. stated that the judicial confession was nothing but a reproduction word by word of his statement made to police. The accused's Advocate therefore, sought to cross-examine both the Magistrate who had recorded the con fession as well as the S. H. O. on this allegation. The question in cross-examination put to the S. H. O. was "Did you mark from the confessional statement given by the accused that it was word by word same as given by him to the Police?" This…