MOHSIN ABBAS vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1702 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.

MOHSIN ABBAS VS State Ss. 302 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Extra-judicial confession--- Scope--- Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Prosecution had examined two witnesses to prove the extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the accused in the case who got recorded their statements and stated that at about 7.00 p.m. the accused and his co-accused (since acquitted) came to the shop of one of the witnesses and confessed to have murdered the deceased---Both the witnesses told the said fact to the complainant of the FIR---Question arose as to why the accused would make his breast clean when apparently he was under no compulsion to oblige the prosecution which was clueless about the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased---Alleged extra-judicial confession was so detailed and comprehensive that it covered almost every aspect of the prosecution case---Man under the stress of compunction of his conscious was not supposed to give such minute details that too on the assurance of help---Witnesses deposed that accused and his co-accused (since acquitted) requested them to arrange pardon for them from the legal heirs of the deceased---Admittedly, both the witnesses of extra-judicial confession admitted in their cross-examination that they did not possess any influential portfolio at that time to have any influence to beg pardon for the accused from the complainant---Said witnesses also admitted in their cross-examination that they did not try to apprehend the accused at the time of making the said extra-judicial confession in spite of the fact that he was allegedly present in their company of his own volition, in a shop---Both the said witnesses were so naive that they let the accused leave the shop without making any effort to apprehend him or his co-accused---Deceased happened to be related to both the witnesses but they did not react at all to the confessional statements of the accused and his co-accused and calmly saw them leaving, without even moving an inch---Said witnesses had not mentioned in their statements that the accused had some weapon when they visited them to confess their guilt about the murder of deceased which could have precluded the said witnesses from apprehending the accused and his co-accused---Said conduct of witnesses was not natural in circumstances---Such peculiar facts spoke volumes regarding the lack of veracity in the statements adduced by witnesses and also shown their unusual behaviour and the same was otherwise contrary to the normal human behaviour---Another reason to reject the statements of said witnesses was that according to those witnesses, after the alleged confession of the accused and his co-accused, they both told the said fact to the complainant of the case on the same day---Witness during cross-examination stated that they told the fact of the confession of the accused before them to complainant of the FIR, within one hour of making of the same---However, the statement of complainant of the FIR found no mention in his statement that both the said witnesses ever told him regarding the said confession of the accused---Overwhelming analysis of the prosecution evidence with regard to extra-judicial confession, it had been concluded that the prosecution had manufactured the said extra-judicial confession in the case to strengthen the case against the accused after taking legal advice in that regard---High Court observed that story introduced by two witnesses about the extra-judicial confession of the accused seemed improbable---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside convictions and sentences recorded by the Trial Court.

MOHSIN ABBAS vs State Ss — 2022 YLR 1702 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR