Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1188 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM RASOOL alias MAH KHAN vs State S — 2024 YLR 1188 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation: 2024 YLR 1188 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court: Balochistan High Court
Year: 2024
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1188 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM RASOOL alias MAH KHAN vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 302; S. 164---Q; S. 164; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1188 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case GHULAM RASOOL alias MAH KHAN VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Confessional statement of accused---Infirmities---Accused was charged for committing murder of the father and brother of the complainant---Judicial Magistrate deposed that on 07.01.2022 the accused was produced before him by the Investigation Officer for recording his statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C and he recorded his statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C and issued a certificate in that regard---Statement of Judicial Magistrate revealed that he had not given sufficient time for reflection to the accused before recording his statement, and it was incumbent upon said witness to have given sufficient time for reflection i.e., 30 minutes with three intervals---Henceforth, by not doing so, Judicial Magistrate failed to observe pre-cautions held necessary before recording a confessional statement--- Judicial Magistrate neither stated a single word in his statement that either he had given sufficient time for reflection to the accused nor did he mention the time given for reflection in the certificates issued beneath the confessional statement of the accused; therefore, the confessional statement of the accused did not appear to be true and voluntary---However, the record showed that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused through direct evidence---Appeal was dismissed with modification in sentence.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

2024 YLR 2656 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Maqsood VS State Ss. 324, 353 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt t…
2024 YLR 2635 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHAbdul Karim VS State S. 497---Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947),Ss. 4, 5, 8 & 23---Payments through informal banking channel of…
2024 YLR 2619 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBijar alias Bijli VS State Ss. 324, 353, 225, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 337-H(2), 147, 148 & 149---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 24---anti-Terror…
2024 YLR 2586 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHFayaz alias Fayaz Hussain VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 337-H(2), 506(2), 148 & 149---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 19…
2024 YLR 2561 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Bilal VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II…
2024 YLR 1497 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHKHALID VS State Minor contradictions in evidence---In consequential---Every contradiction can not take place of a material contradiction and…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English