ALI REHMAN vs State Ss — 2021 YLRN 118 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ALI REHMAN VS State Ss. 302, 311, 109 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, tazir after waiver or compounding of right of qisas in qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Confession, recording of---Infirmities---Effect---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of his sister and son of complainant on the pretext of honour---Judicial Magistrate in cross-examination, admitted that he was Urdu speaking whereas the accused was Pashto speaking, however, he did not ask him about his educational background---Judicial Magistrate further admitted that he had not administered oath to the Reader before utilizing his services as a translator---Admittedly, both the Judicial Magistrate and the present accused did not know the languages of each other and Reader of the Court had acted as an interpreter/translator between them while recording the confessional statement---Best and legal course for the Judicial Magistrate in the mentioned situation was to administer oath to the Reader before recording confession for getting the satisfaction that what the Judicial Magistrate had recorded in his handwriting was the actual utterance of the accused and was translated word by word by the Reader without any alteration---Even the prosecution had not produced the Reader of the Court as prosecution witness---Judicial Magistrate had also not clarified in his statement that in what manner he had asked the questions mentioned in memorandum of inquiry through his Reader and how he read over the confession to accused, therefore, it could not be ascertained from the available record that the accused understood the nature and significance of the questions put to him by Judicial Magistrate before recording his confession---Judicial Magistrate though had stated that he handed over the accused to Naib Court, however, Investigating Officer had admitted in his cross-examination that the accused was handed over to him, thus, neither the relevant procedure was adopted in letter and spirit before recording the confession nor Judicial Magistrate had taken the precautions for ascertaining that the accused was recording his true and voluntary statement under S.364 read with S.164, Cr.P.C.---Confession in the present case, being unreliable and untrustworthy, was kept out of consideration in circumstances---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

ALI REHMAN vs State Ss — 2021 YLRN 118 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported