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---Weapon of offence recovered on the disclosure of the accused---Reliance--- Scope--- Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by firing---Record showed that the disclosure of the accused made at the time of the recovery of 30-bore pistol was admissible and relevant and amounted to confession of guilt under the provisions of Art. 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Discovery of any fact on the information of the accused in custody of Police is admissible under Art. 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---According to the prosecution case itself the accused had already made a confession of his guilt before the witnesses, the dead body had already been recovered, whereas the said recovery of 30-bore pistol was effected after more than a month---No new information was made available to the prosecution as all the details of the occurrence were already in knowledge of the prosecution by virtue of the alleged extra-judicial confession of the accused---Alleged statement of the accused made in police custody at the time of recovery of the pistol 30-bore could not be read in evidence and would remain inadmissible---Pointing out the place of murder of the deceased was also not relevant as no new fact was discovered in consequence of said pointing out and the place of occurrence was already in knowledge of the witnesses---Regarding the recovery of the 30 bore pistol from the accused, the same could not be relied upon as the fact remained that Investigating Officer of the case did not join any witness of the locality during the recovery of the said 30-bore pistol from the accused which was in clear violation of S.103 of the Cr.P.C. and therefore could not be used as incriminating evidence against the accused, being evidence which was obtained through illegal means and was hence hit by the exclusionary rule of evidence---Witness, in whose presence the alleged recovery of 30-bore pistol was made, was related to the witness as his uncle---Witness further admitted that his house was situated at a distance of four kilometers from the place of recovery---Complainant further admitted that the Investigating Officer did not ask any person resident of the area surrounding the place of recovery despite the fact that many of them had gathered there at the said time---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