| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 2911 2007 SLD 2911 2007 PLD 12 |
Quetta High Court
Murder Reference No. 6 of 2006 and Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2006, decided on 13th November, 2006. DATE of hearing: 9th October, 2006
AMANULLAH KHAN, C.J. AND AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, J
Bashir Ahmed Qazi Special Prosecutor A.T.A. for Appellants (in M.R.No. 6 of 2006). Basharatullah for
Respondents (in M.R. No. 6 of 2006). Bashir Ahmed Qazi Special Prosecutor A.T.A. for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2006). Basharatullah with A
Murder Reference No. 6 of 2006 and Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2006, decided on 13th November, 2006. DATE of hearing: 9th October, 2006
AMANULLAH KHAN, C.J. AND AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, J
Bashir Ahmed Qazi Special Prosecutor A.T.A. for Appellants (in M.R.No. 6 of 2006). Basharatullah for
Respondents (in M.R. No. 6 of 2006). Bashir Ahmed Qazi Special Prosecutor A.T.A. for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2006). Basharatullah with A
THE STATE and others
VS
ASMATULLAH and others
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1869)--- ----Ss. 302(b) & 364-A/34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXV of 1997), Ss.7(A), 21-I---Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10---Appreciation of evidence---Father and mother of deceased girl had submitted compromise supported by their affidavit that they had compromised with accused---Prosecution mainly had relied upon confessional statement of accused recorded by Judicial Magistrate---Alleged confessional statement which had been made before the police, had no evidentiary value because any confession made by accused before the police, was not admissible in evidence---No new fact or circumstance having been discovered on the disclosure and pointation of accused, confession made by accused before the police or pointation of places which were already in the knowledge of police, could not be used as evidence against him---Even otherwise accused who allegedly made confessional statement being in custody of police, possibility could not be ruled out that confessional statement was tutored one and result of torture as claimed by accused---Judicial Magistrate also did not satisfy 'himself as to whether confessional statement was voluntary or a result of torture---Prosecution witness who identified bag in question of accused was brother of complainant and according to him on one occasion said bag was handed over to him by accused for repair--Said story was neither plausible nor natural and appeared to have been concocted in order to connect accused with commission of offence---Even at the best same could be used as corroboratory piece of evidence and no conviction could independently be based on such evidence---Motive relied upon by prosecution, would not alone be sufficient to sustain conviction being double edged---Judgment rendered by Special Judge Anti-Terrorism Court, was set aside and accused was acquitted of the charge---Murder reference was answered in negative. PLD 1976 SC 404 rel. JUDGMENT AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, J.---This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31-5-2006, whereby; the appellant was found guilty under sections 364-A/34, P.P.C. and sentenced to death. He was also found guilty…
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