Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AFZAL versus THE STATE

ECTIONS Section 302 (b), 337 J& 109 at Murder, poisoning and shortage of evidence evidence Definition of evidence re Defendant's confessional statement - The accused confessed that he killed eight of his family - The accused confessed to the offender. While recording the statement before the magistrate, the accused proved himself guilty of re-accusation - During the trial, the accused proved further crime - the accused committed the incident at any stage from the time of his arrest. Was denied until his statement was recorded. Section 342 CCPC alleged business statements which were recorded by the accused person were voluntarily proved and were not the result of any repression and violence was The accused as per the procedure laid down by the CRPC in the Judicial Magistrate. The person's statements were recorded, and there were no procedural anomalies. Be found in it - the accused admitted in the prosecution case, the manner and manner of the incident was proved by the prosecution. Serious statement can be sentenced to any accused, if the court is satisfied that the confessional statement was accurate and voluntary, the statements of the prosecution witnesses also indicate that the accused killed 8 members of his family, He was caught on the spot on dyed hands. A prosecution case against the accused was proved. The appeal against the sentence is accordingly dismissed [Page 764] A

P L D 2017 Lahore 750 

Before Aalia Neelum, and Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi, JJ

MUHAMMAD AFZAL—Appellant

versus

THE STATE and others—Respondents

Criminal Appeal No.34-J and Murder Reference No.39 of 2012, heard on 9th May, 2016.

(a) Penal Code (XLV of I860)—

—Ss. 302(b), 337-J & 109—Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison and abetment—Appreciation of evidence—Confessional statement of accused—Accused admitted that he committed murder of eight persons of his family—Accused pleaded guilty at the time of recording statement before the Magistrate—Accused again pleaded guilty at the time of framing charge—During the trial, accused further pleaded guilty—Accused had not denied the occurrence at any stage from the time of his arrest till his statement recorded under S.342 Cr.P.C.—Confessional statements recorded by accused person, proved to be voluntary and was not result of duress and any violence—Judicial Magistrate, had recorded the statements of accused person according to procedure laid down in the Cr.P.C, and no procedural irregularities could be found therein—Accused admitted the prosecution case, the mode and manner of the occurrence was duly proved by the prosecution—Conviction, on the basis of confessional statement, could be awarded to an accused, if the court was satisfied that the confessional statement was true and voluntary—Statements of prosecution witnesses also indicated that accused committed murder of eight persons of his family end he was caught red handed at the spot— Case of prosecution against accused was proved—Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. [p. 764] A

(b) Penal Code (XLV of I860)—

—Ss. 302 (b), 337-J & 109—Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison and abetment—Appreciation of evidence—Ocular account, corroborating medical evidence—Postmortem and medico-legal reports fully corroborated time of occurrence, nature of injuries, weapon of offence used in the occurrence and locale of injuries sustained by the deceased persons— Medical evidence was absolutely in line with the ocular account and as such had fully supported the case of prosecution—Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly, [p. 766] B

(c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-

—Ss. 302 (b), 337-J & 109—Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison and abetment—Appreciation of evidence—Motive, proof of— During investigation, the prosecution witnesses of ocular account had sufficiently explained about the motive by stating that parents of accused were often used to quarrel with each other—Mother of accused used to blame her husband gambler, while father of accused used to blame his mother of being of loose character—Due to the dispute between his parents, accused committed murder of the inmates of the house—Accused got recorded his confessional statement wherein, he narrated the story as stated by the prosecution witnesses—Accused also stated that 4/5 years ago he saw his mother with another man sleeping together on one bed—Accused made complaint about the illicit relation of his mother to his father and grand mother but of no avail— Prosecution witnesses had not stated that mother of accused was of bad character—Confessional statement of the accused, in circumstances, was sufficient to prove the motive—Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly, fp. 766] C

(d) Penal Code (XLV of I860)—

—Ss. 302 (b), 337-J & 109—Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison and abetment—Appreciation of evidence—Recovery of weapon of offence from accused—Reliance—Weapon of offence had been recovered on the pointation of accused—Crime empties had also been collected during spot inspection—Positive report of Forensic Science Laboratory had provided full corroboration to the ocular account in the case—Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. [p. 767] D

(e) Penal Code (XLV of I860)—

—Ss. 302 (b), 337-J & 109—Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison and abetment—Appreciation of evidence—Accused was charged of murder and named in FIR—Specific role had been attributed to the accused about making fire-shots on deceased persons—Accused was arrested red handed from the place of occurrence—Prosecution produced two eye-witnesses which had sufficiently explained the mode and manner as well as each and every segment of the occurrence— Evidence of eye-witnesses was supported by medical evidence and corroborated by recovery of weapons of offence along with positive report of Forensic Science Laboratory—Judicial confession of the accused was also available on record—Prosecution had proved the case against the accused—Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly, fp. 768] E

immigration advocates email from Nilam lawyer