AMJAD vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 1205 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

AMJAD VS STATE Ss. 302(b), 364, 365, 201, 202, 149 & 109---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, kidnapping or abducting a person with the intent to murder or to place them in danger of murder, kidnapping, causing disappearance of evidence of offence or giving false information to screen offender, intentional omission to give information about an offence by a person legally bound to inform, unlawful assembly, abetment---Appreciation of evidence---Confessional statement of accused neither voluntary nor truthful---Accused were charged for committing murder of the son of complainant and his friend after their abduction---Confessional statement recorded by appellant divulged that undeniably he had admitted commission of the offence along with his co-appellant, wherein he had attributed the role of firing to himself as well as to his co-appellant upon the deceased but his statement was found fully silent to the extent of recovery and discovery, allegedly made on joint pointation of the appellants---Keeping in view the very short narration of confession by not even mentioning the solid reason for committing the crime, the confession was neither voluntary nor truthful in nature as according to certificate annexed with the confessional statement, the Judicial Magistrate did not mention that specific time was provided to him for thinking over the recording of confessional statement---Besides, as was evident from the certificates annexed with the confessional statements that the accused was handed over back to Naib Court after recording his statement, nothing could be brought on record to show that whether the appellant was medically examined before and after recording confessional statement, which procedure was mandatory under the High Court Rules and Police Rules---Both the appellants, after their arrest, had remained in police custody for long seven (07) days as they were arrested in the case on 03.03.2017 and on 10.03.2017 the appellant had statedly confessed his guilt, thus, possibility of use of third degree tactics by the police could not be ruled out of consideration---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

AMJAD vs STATE Ss — 2026 YLR 1205 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR