MUHAMMAD USMAN vs State S — 2025 YLR 857 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.

MUHAMMAD USMAN VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Judicial confession of accused voluntary---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of his father and mother---Appellant was arrested on 09.08.2021 and he was produced before the Judicial Magistrate for recording his confessional statement on 10.08.2021---No evidence was available on record to remotely show that the appellant was subjected to any torture, inducement, or promise---Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the confessional statement of the appellant while appearing before the Trial Court deposed that after fulfilling all the formalities within the meaning of S. 364, Cr.P.C., he recorded the confessional statement of the appellant, and that sufficient time was given to the appellant to think over his confession---Replies of the appellant to the questions put to him before recording his confessional statement left no room for any doubt that his confessional statement was involuntarily or the result of torture, force, inducement, or promise---Judicial Magistrate had been subjected to lengthy and taxing cross-examination by the defence, but nothing could be extracted from his mouth to prove that the confessional statement of the appellant was the result of force, torture, promise, or inducement---While recording the confessional statement of the appellant, the Judicial Magistrate had taken all the precautions and had faithfully complied with all the formalities as envisaged under S. 364, Cr.P.C.---Accumulative effect of all the circumstances led to only one conclusion that the appellant made true judicial confession voluntarily and without any pressure and was fully involved in the matter, which was corroborated by the ocular evidence of eye-witnesses, and same could safely be used against the appellant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt, however, due to mitigating circumstances, the death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life---Appeal was dismissed with modification in sentence.

MUHAMMAD USMAN vs State S — 2025 YLR 857 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR