ABDUL NASIR vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 1811 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

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

ABDUL NASIR VS State Ss. 497 & 161--- anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 7 & 21-H---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 34---act of terrorism, qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, refusal of---Confessional statement---Scope---Plea of the petitioner/accused was that a prosecution witness, on whose statement recorded under S. 161 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, he was implicated, had resiled from his statement and had submitted his affidavit to said effect---Validity---Record revealed that although the petitioner/accused was not directly nominated in the FIR but later on the local police had arrested him as suspect of murder of the deceased---During course of investigation , the petitioner/accused confessed his guilt stating that he had committed murder of deceased in presence of a witness; accordingly police arrested said witness and recorded his (witness') statement under S. 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, wherein he had categorically implicated/ involved the petitioner in the present case; thereafter, police had discharged the said witness under S. 169 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898---although the petitioner/accused had obtained an affidavit from the prosecution witness after dismissal of his bail by the anti-Terrorism Court, whereby he resiled from his previous statement recorded under S. 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 by the police as eye-witness---However, at bail stage, evidence of witness recorded by the police could not be kept out of consideration on the basis of affidavit filed by the said witness, hence the evidentiary value of the affidavit-in-question would be considered/evaluated at the time of trial of the petitioner/accused by the Trial Court as deeper appreciation of evidence was not permissible at bail stage---at bail stage, Court was supposed to do tentative assessment of material available on record which was to be different from final appraisement and evaluation of evidence which would be recorded by the Trial Court---Tentative assessment of material, collected by the prosecution during investigation, revealed that petitioner's confessional statement under S. 21-H of the anti-Terrorism, 1997, had been recorded by the Officer of the rank of Superintendent Police, wherein he had admitted, in presence of the witness, that he had committed murder of the deceased; and police had prepared site plan of recovery of weapon of offence on the pointation of the petitioner/accused in presence of independent marginal witness as allegedly the crime weapon was thrown into river/Nallah by him after committing murder of the deceased---Chief Court observed that the petitioner/accused was, prima facie, connected with the commission of offence of murder of the deceased---Bail was declined to the petitioner/accused, in circumstances. Head NotesCase Description

ABDUL NASIR vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 1811 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ