ADIL BACHA vs State Ss — 2021 YLRN 51 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.

ADIL BACHA VS State Ss. 302 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention--- Appreciation of evidence---Confessional statement, recording of---Infirmities---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of father of the complainant by firing---Judicial Magistrate, who recorded confessional statements of the accused in his cross-examination, disclosed that accused and co-accused were produced before him and on that very day they did not volunteer to record their confessional statements---Two days physical custody of the accused was granted and on expiry of custody both the accused were produced before him through a single application---Judicial Magistrate had admitted that he had not mentioned that at the time of recording statement of co-accused, accused was made to sit outside the court---Similar was the position when the statement of accused was being recorded by him---Witness admitted that in the respective certificates attached with the confessional statement of the accused, Judicial Magistrate had not specifically mentioned that he read over to them their confessional statements in Pushto or was so explained---Confessional statements of the accused recorded by the Judicial Magistrate showed that the same being involuntary and result of torture as well as suffering from mandatory procedural irregularities was the most suspicious piece of evidence in the whole case, besides having been retracted---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused through cogent and confidence inspiring direct or circumstantial evidence---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

ADIL BACHA vs State Ss — 2021 YLRN 51 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported