SCMR 2008

2008 PLP 1033 (SCMR)

MOHIM KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Jail Petition No.233 of 2007, decided on 25th April, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Qaim Jan Khan and Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 1033 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Muhammad Qaim Jan Khan and Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, JJ
Parties MOHIM KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1033 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1033 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Qaim Jan Khan and Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1033 (SCMR) (MOHIM KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
  • Mehmood Raza, Additional Advocate-General for the State.
  • 2. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General argued that confessional statement has been recorded on the very next day and no question of coercion can arise; that the evidence is duly corroborated with recovery and also supported by medical evidence.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 11-12-2006 passed by High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, in Criminal Jail Appeal No.87 of 2003).

S. 302

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)

Contentions of the accused were that there was a delay of 18 hours in lodging the F.I.R.; it was a night occurrence and the alleged confession was the result of coercion

State Counsel, on the other hand argued that confessional statement had been recorded on the very next day and thus, no question of coercion could arise and that the evidence was duly corroborated with recovery and also supported by medical evidence

Supreme Court, in order to thrash out the real facts and reach the correct conclusion in accordance with the laid down principles of safe administration of criminal justice granted leave to appeal. Mehmood Raza, Additional Advocate-General for the State.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD QAIM JAN KHAN, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner stressed that there is a great delay of 18 hours in lodging the F.I.R..; one Shah Nawaz was charged for the murder of deceased; it is a night occurrence and the alleged confession is the result of coercion.

2. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General argued that confessional statement has been recorded on the very next day and no question of coercion can arise; that the evidence is duly corroborated with recovery and also supported by medical evidence.

3. In order to thrash out the real facts and reach the correct conclusion in accordance with the laid down principles of safe administration of criminal justice, leave is hereby granted. M.B.A./M-23/SC Leave granted.