2633/2024 Cr.Bail MUHAMMAD SALEEM S/O TAJ MUHAMMAD (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)

Sindh High Court2024

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)

Share on WhatsApp
2633/2024 Cr.Bail MUHAMMAD SALEEM S/O TAJ MUHAMMAD (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Order Date: 10-DEC-24 It appears from the record that the applicant is not nominated in the FIR and no recovery has been effected from his possession. The only allegation against the applicant that facilitated the co-accused who had named him in the present crime, this factum was recorded by the trial court in the order. The alleged extra-judicial confession of co-accused made before police, if any, is not admissible under Articles 38 and 39 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, that no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence, while Article 39 emphasizes that, subject to Article 40, no confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person. Seemingly, a confession made before the police is not made admissible by dint of the aforesaid provisions of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984 in order to preserve and safeguard the philosophy of safe administration of criminal justice and is also based on public policy. In the aforesaid backdrop, I am sanguine that the case of applicant requires further inquiry to prove his guilt which can only be thrashed out after recording of evidence in the trial Court. On the aforesaid proposition I am guided by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ikram-ul-Haq v Raja Naveed Sabir & others (2012 SCMR 1273).
Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Red Notices against Foreign National Proclaimed Offender

PLJ 2024 Karachi 138 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2024

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013 explained in a Judgment

PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154 · Sindh High Court · 2022

Article 140- Cross Examination of a Witness

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020

Re-Examination is more important than Examination in Chief

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020