SARDAR MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2023 PCrLJ 964 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.

SARDAR MUHAMMAD VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Delay in recording confessional statement of accused by the Court---Effect---Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife, who was daughter of the complainant---Record showed that the confessional statement of accused was recorded under S. 164, Cr.P.C. by the Judicial Magistrate, wherein the accused allegedly confessed his guilt of committing the murder of his deceased wife on the allegations of Siya Kari that his deceased wife had kept illicit relations with his step brother and earlier accused had warned his wife and also apprised the situation to his parents, but despite such fact the deceased did not mend her way and continued illicit relations with her paramour and according to the contents of confessional statement allegedly the deceased had admitted that she had committed Zina with her paramour twelve times---Irrespective of the contents of confessional statement, the admitted feature of the case was that the accused was arrested on 28th June 2020 and his confessional statement was recorded on 13th July 2020 i.e. on the sixteenth day of his arrest---No explanation on the part of prosecution had been furnished that as to why the accused remained under custody for more than the provided period of remand---Even otherwise, according to that witness the custody of accused after recording his statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C., was handed over to the Investigating Officer for judicial lock-up---According to settled norms of justice, voluntariness of confession was doubtful when recorded after unauthorized confinement of accused---Admittedly, confession was obtained after keeping the accused in illegal police custody, thus serious doubts were created with regard to its voluntariness and the element of blackmailing and torturing could not be ruled out of consideration---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

SARDAR MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2023 PCrLJ 964 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ