NOOR AHMED alias AHMED AGHA vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 1126 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

NOOR AHMED alias AHMED AGHA VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Confessional statement of accused---Infirmities---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant---Judicial Magistrate while recording statement and issuing certificate had not given sufficient time for reflection before recording statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C., as it was incumbent upon her to have had given sufficient time of reflection---Judicial Magistrate did not state a single word in her statement that she had given sufficient time of reflection---Judicial Magistrate failed to observe the pre-cautions held to be necessary before recording confessional statement---Certificate issued by her as envisaged under S. 364(2), Cr.P.C., lacked the time of reflection---Said facts and circumstances had not only made the statement of the Judicial Magistrate unreliable but worthy of no credence too; as such, no explicit reliance could be placed thereupon---Perusal of the confessional statement showed that Questions put to the maker and certificate did not suggest that handcuffs of the confessor were removed prior to making a confession---Judicial Magistrate did not state a single word in her statement that either she removed the handcuffs of the accused while recording the statement---Statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C., of the accused, the same could not be said as voluntary and appeared to be inadmissible in the eye of law as the Judicial Magistrate, in cross-examination, had admitted that the accused gave his judicial confession on oath and that oath administered to the accused was violative of S. 5 of the Oaths Act, 1873---Confession, therefore, was recorded in contravention of S. 5 of the Oaths Act, 1873---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt--- Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Head NotesCase Description

NOOR AHMED alias AHMED AGHA vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 1126 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ