PCRLJ 1996

1996 P Cr (PLP)

QAISAR ABBAS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
1995-August-15
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1996 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties QAISAR ABBAS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 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: 1996 P Cr (PLP) (QAISAR ABBAS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Sahibzada Farooq Ali for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 426

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34

Suspension of sentence-- Case against accused was registered at the instance of father-in-law of deceased

No direct evidence was available to connect accused with murder, of deceased except extra judicial confession by accused before prosecution witnesses who- were close relative of deceased

Appeal of accused against his conviction and sentence remained un disposed of for a period of more than two yea's and there was no likelihood of fixation of his appeal in the near future-- Whether conviction of accused could sustain on the basis of an extra judicial confession allegedly made by accused before close relative of deceased on the following day of the occurrence was yet to be determined

Prosecution witnesses before whom extra judicial confession was allegedly made had never disclosed that fact during investigation before Police Officer when their statements under S.161, Cr.P.C. were recorded

Prosecution had also not been able to point out any reason as to why accused should not be releases on bail

Sentence of accused thus was suspended and he was allowed bail.

Judgment & Decree

Qaiser Abbas, the petitioner, having been convicted and sentenced under section 302(b), P.P.C. to imprisonment for life and Rs.20,000 as fine and in default of payment thereto to further undergo two years' R.I. The fine, if realized, to be defrayed to the legal heirs of the deceased, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, vide judgment, dated 7-7-1993, has presently sought suspension thereof through this petition filed under section 426, Cr.P.C.

2. It seems essential to give the backgrounds of this case to decide the instant petition. A case F.I.R. No.82/91, dated 28-2-1991 was registered with Police Station, Basti Malook, District Multan for an occurrence which took place on the same day at about 2 p.m. under, section 302/34, P.P.C. against Khuda Bakhsh, Muhammad Amir and Muhammad Aslam for the murder of Mst. Safia, daughter-in-law of the complainant. During the investigation, all the three above-named accused persons were found innocent. The petitioner had allegedly made a confessional statement before Muhammad Shafique (P.W.7) and Munir Ahmad (P.W.8) on the following day of the occurrence about his guilt.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued his case that there is no such direct evidence against the petitioner on the file and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further argued that the assailants were seen while running away from the venue of the occurrence and were named in the F.I.R. It was a daylight murder and there was no misunderstanding regarding the identification of the accused persons, who were known to the witnesses. Maintains that there was no such occasion for the petitioner to make a confessional statement before the above said P.Ws, who are closely related to the deceased.

4. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner were opposed with vehemence by the learned State Counsel as well as the learned counsel for the complainant on the ground that the case was registered against three persons wrongly and the complainant intentionally suppressed the crime of the petitioner, who later on made a confessional statement before the witnesses, and supported the view taken by the learned trial Court.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at full length and have also given my anxious considerations to the arguments advanced by them.

6. The learned trial Court has very categorically admitted that there was no direct evidence proving that Qaisar Abbas, the accused/petitioner, committed the murder of Mst. Safia Bibi. The case as admittedly registered at the instance of Abdul Hameed, father-in-law of the deceased. Prima facie, no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime except extra judicial confession, statedly made by him, before Muhammad Shafique and Munir Ahmad (P.Ws.7 and 8) respectively. Muhammad Shafique (P.W.7) is brother of the deceased Mst. Safia Bibi and Munir Ahmad (P.W.8) was a close relative of the deceased. The conviction as to whether can sustain on the basis of extra-judicial confession, made by the petitioner on the following day of the occurrence? It is also to be seen that the aforesaid P.Ws.7 and 8 never disclosed this fact during the investigation before the Police Officer when their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. were being recorded.

7. The petitioner was arrested on 7-7-1993 and since then he is in the judicial lock-up and there is no likelihood of the fixation of his appeal in the near future and the appeal of the petitioner against his conviction and sentence has remained undisposed of, for a period of more than two years in this Court. In addition thereto, the prosecution has also not been able to point out any reason why the accused should not be released on bail. 8 In view of the above submissions, the sentence is suspended and the petitioner is allowed bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Multan, till the disposal of the appeal.

9. Criminal Miscellaneous stands disposed of. H.B.T./Q-43/L Petition allowed.