1997 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM SHABBIR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1997 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GHULAM SHABBIR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM SHABBIR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Taqi Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426(1)
Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.37
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302(b)
Joint extra-judicial confession allegedly made by accused and his co-accused was inadmissible in evidence, even otherwise evidence of extra judicial confession was the weakest type of evidence unless corroborated by some independent and unimpeachable evidence
Statement of the prosecution witness claiming himself to be an eye witness recorded after 21 days of the occurrence, prima facie, did not inspire confidence
Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was allowed bail accordingly.
[Confession].
Judgment & Decree
Taqi Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Miss Tasneem Amin for the State. Ghulam Rasool son of Rahmat Ali, aged 27/28 years, petitioner has moved application under section 426, Cr.P.C. for suspension of conviction of sentence of life imprisonment (S.-I.) awarded to him under section 302(b), P.P.C. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala vide judgment, dated 21-3-1995 in case F.I.R. No.323, dated 19-8-1993 under section 302/34, P.P.C., Police Station Satellite Town, Gujranwala.
2. The suspension of sentence is sought on the ground that no overt act has been attributed to him except that he stood nearby when his co-accused inflicted Chhuri blows to the deceased; the trial Court relied on extra judicial confession and on the statement of P.W.4 recorded after 24 days of occurrence and no notice is alleged to the petitioner.
3. Father of the deceased got registered F.I.R. Exh. P.A. on the same day of occurrence in which neither he mentioned the names of the culprits nor had shown any suspicion as to the murderous; the petitioner, alongwith the co -accused was arrested on 4-10-1993 on the basis of extra judicial confession and on the statement of P.W.4 Sana Ullah, recorded after 21 days of the occurrence; who had stated that he had seen the occurrence on 19-8-1993. While P.W.5 (Bashir Ahmad's) statement was recorded after 18 days of the occurrence wherein he stated that the petitioner told him that he had taken the deceased just in the street and co-accused had inflicted Chhuri blows to the deceased and P.W.6, Muhammad Akram stated even his statement was recorded after 15 days, that the petitioner and co-accused met him very next day of occurrence and had confessed murder of the deceased and sought the witness to get pardon for committing the said offence from his relative.
4. The petitioner has challenged the legality of the order, which carries weight as it is well-settled that a joint extra-judicial confession is inadmissible in evidence, even otherwise it is also well-settled that evidence of extra judicial, confession is a weakest type of evidence unless corroborated by independent and unimpeachable evidence, the evidence of P.W.4 was recorded after 21 days prima facie is not confidence inspiring. 4-A. Keeping in view the above circumstances, the conviction and sentence; awarded to the petitioner is suspended and is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./G-9/L Sentence suspended