MUNIR AHMAD alias MUNA vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 797 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MUNIR AHMAD alias MUNA VS State Ss. 302(b), 392 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Extra-judicial confession---Scope---Accused were charged for murdering the son of complainant by firing while committing robbery---Record showed that whole prosecution story against the accused rested upon the alleged disclosure by the father of accused before the complainant and prosecution witnesses that his son committed the occurrence in question with the help of other co-accused---Although prosecution side had termed it as extra-judicial confession on behalf of accused but that alleged information rendered by father of accused could not be termed as extra-judicial confession because confession or extra-judicial confession as the case might be was always made by the accused himself and not by any other person on his behalf---Statements of prosecution witnesses were not corroborating each other's stance regarding alleged information given by father of accused---Complainant in his statement stated that he along with two other persons were sitting near their Drawing Room (Baithak), when father of accused, came their and admitted that his son along with co-accused committed that occurrence and beseeched to pardon him and also promised to pay compensation to the legal heirs of deceased---Other witness had not stated that complainant was also present with him because in his statement he had stated that he along with other was sitting near his Drawing Room (Baithak) when father of accused came there---Said sole fact had shattered the credibility of whole episode allegedly occurred regarding disclosure of father of accused and was sufficient to belie the story of prosecution regarding involvement of accused---Said fact was also nullified from the fact that in his statement the witness categorically stated that when he along with other was sitting near his Drawing Room (Baithak), grandfather of co-accused came there and told him that the occurrence was committed by his grandson along with co-accused---Said witnesses did not report the matter to the local police or complainant, waited for more than a year and it was only after the disclosure of father of accused he was nominated in the occurrence---All the said facts and circumstances, material discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses regarding alleged disclosure of guilt of accused and his co-accused by their family members and nomination of accused in the case seemed highly sceptical---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

MUNIR AHMAD alias MUNA vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 797 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ