| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1955 SLG 92 1955 SLD 92 1955 PLD 375 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 591 of 1954, decided on 23rd November 1954 from the order of Ch. Muhammad Din, Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 28th June 1954
SHABIR AHMAD AND ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, JJ
Quttub-ud-Din Ahmad and Malik Zia Ullah, for Appellant. S. A. Mahmud, Assistant Advocate-General, for
Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 591 of 1954, decided on 23rd November 1954 from the order of Ch. Muhammad Din, Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 28th June 1954
SHABIR AHMAD AND ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, JJ
Quttub-ud-Din Ahmad and Malik Zia Ullah, for Appellant. S. A. Mahmud, Assistant Advocate-General, for
Respondent
IFTIKHARUDDIN
VS
THE CROWN
Law:
Section:
(a) Approver-Statement of-Not a confession-Not subject to prohibition of S. 24, Evidence Act (1 of 2872) or to provisions of S. 264 (3), Cr. P. C.-Statement admissible under S. 339 (2) Cr. P. C. against approver at his own trial, after forfeiture of pardon-Necessity of corroboration-Statement should be taken as a whole. When a person is made an approver, his statement has clearly resulted from an inducement and a promise of immunity from prosecution with regard to the offence in which he admits having been concerned, but when such a person is a witness, section 24 of the Evidence Act can have no application, as his statement is not being used as a confession but as a piece of evidence against persons other than himself. Nor would such a statement be inadmissible on the ground that it was not recorded in terms of section 164 (3), Cr. P. C. But when an approver is put on his trial, after forfeiture of pardon, for the offence with regard to which he had been granted pardon, his statement in the previous trial of his accomplice is admissible under the provisions of section 339 (2), Cr. P. C.' 'though it would otherwise have been inadmissible because of section 24, Evidence Act, inasmuch as such a statement was obviously the result of an inducement, viz., tender of pardon. The rule as to corroboration of an approver's statement applies also when such statement is used against him at his own trial after forfeiture of pardon. Approver's statement before the committing Magistrate should be taken as a whole including the part wherein he says he has not concealed anything and that the terms of the pardon had been complied with. (b) Confession-Remains a confession even if offence confessed to is not the one charged against maker thereof and is subject to all provisions o f law in regard to confessions. A statement which suggests that the maker thereof had been guilty of an offence is a confession and even if the offence confessed to is not the one of which the maker of the statement is accused, the statement nevertheless remains a confession and will be subject to all provisions of law which deal with confessions. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 337-Tender…
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