FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA vs State — 2026 SCMR 413 SUPREME-COURT

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

FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA VS State. Sections 302(b) & 34, Pakistan Penal Code, 1860---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Section 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention, act of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Confessional statement of accused---Compliance with legal safeguards---Scope. Accused were charged for committing murder of brother of complainant. Confessional statements of petitioners-convicts were recorded by Magistrate Section-30. Held: On scrutiny of record and testimony of said Magistrate, confessional statements were recorded strictly in accordance with mandatory requirements of Sections 164 and 364, Cr.P.C. Each confessional statement was recorded separately and all legal safeguards were observed. Sufficient time for reflection was provided to petitioners-convicts before recording their statements. In their respective confessional statements, petitioners-convicts furnished detailed account of occurrence as well as conspiracy allegedly planned by them for committing murder of deceased. Confessional statements were mutually corroborative and consistent with each other on material particulars. According to confessional statement of petitioner-convict "F", he bore grudge against deceased arising from judicial proceedings in which he was produced before deceased while in custody. Such grievance became motive behind murder of deceased. Petitioner-convict "F" admitted his role of firing at deceased, whereas co-convicts also assigned same role to him in their confessional statements. Judicial Magistrate who recorded confessional statements satisfied the Court that all procedural requirements were meticulously complied with. Defence subjected Judicial Magistrate to extensive cross-examination but failed to bring anything on record suggesting coercion, threat, inducement or undue influence. Confessional statements therefore constituted strong corroborative evidence supporting ocular account. Conviction of petitioner-convict "F" was maintained, however, death sentence was commuted to imprisonment for life. Conviction and sentence of remaining petitioners-convicts did not warrant interference. Petition was converted into appeal and partly allowed.

FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA vs State — 2026 SCMR 413 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR