BASHIR AHMED vs State S — 2025 YLR 1042 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.

BASHIR AHMED VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Extra-judicial confession doubtful---Accused was charged for committing murder of the son of complainant by throwing him from mountain---Complainant alleged in his report as well as in his statement that the appellant admitted his guilt in front of two witnesses---Prosecution produced one of the said witnesses, according to his version three to four days after the funeral of the deceased, he, other witness, and two other persons were sitting with appellant and inquiring about the death of deceased when appellant told them that the deceased did not fall down from the hills rather he had hit a stone on his head, who received injuries and later on succumbed to the injuries---Said witness further stated that he also recorded a video of the event, saved the same in a USB, and handed over the USB to the Investigation Officer---Alleged admission of guilt of the appellant before said witness was an informal admission, which was known as extra-judicial confession, which meant an out of court statement which was adverse to the case of the person making it---Said piece of evidence was of no avail to the prosecution, and it was not understandable as to why the appellant made an extra-judicial confession before said witness, although he was not an influential person---Moreover, it did not appeal to a prudent mind as to what prompted the appellant to confess his guilt before the said witness because, at that time, there was no evidence against the appellant regarding his involvement in the crime---Furthermore, at the time of the alleged extra-judicial confession made by the appellant, the witness before whom he confessed his guilt did not try to catch hold of the appellant---Another most important and natural purpose of making an extra-judicial confession is to seek help from a third person, and the same is usually sought from an influential person who has some authority/power in the society---In the case in hand, the witness of the extra-judicial confession was an ordinary person--- Extra-judicial confession had never been considered sufficient for recording a conviction on a capital charge unless it was strongly corroborated by tangible evidence coming from an unimpeachable source---Thus, such piece of evidence was entirely insufficient to maintain conviction on such a charge, more so, when it was a badly tainted one and appeared to be the job of the Investigating Officer who usually indulge in such like police chicanery---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

BASHIR AHMED vs State S — 2025 YLR 1042 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR