942/2024 Cr.Bail ISMAIL S/O MOMIN KHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-JUL-24
On the point of the defense version, as pleaded by the accused, is concerned, he submitted that this Court is not to make a probe into the defense version to advance a plea of bail, rather it has to assess tentatively the material produced before it and to see if reasonable ground exists to believe, prima facie involvement of accused in the commission of the offense and if the accused found connected with the commission of the offense, he will not be released on bail based on further inquiry. Per learned counsel, the applicants/Accused has failed to demonstrate mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or police to falsely implicate him in this case. He next argued that so far as the plea of the applicant/accused Ismail that his extra-judicial confession was recorded in police custody, thus not admissible under Articles 38 & 39 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, is concerned, the legal position in such a case is that if any incriminatory material related to the case is recovered or any fact is discovered in consequence of the information conveyed by the accused person, then the information so received would be admissible in evidence within the purview of Article 40 of the Qanun-e- Shahadat Order, 1984 because then the presumption would be towards its truthfulness. Since the disclosure of the accused Ismail has been followed by the recovery of some stolen property as well as the discovery of new facts of selling the gold ornaments including the present applicant/accused Habibullah, which earlier was not known. He argued that Article 40, of Qanoon-e-Shahadat, provides that when any fact is revealed in consequence of information received from any accused in the custody of a police officer, such information whether it amounts to a confession or not as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved. The information supplied by the applicant Ismail under Article 40 ibid relating to incriminating articles is admissible. In support of his contention, he relied upon the case of Muhammad Akbar v The State 1995 SCMR 693, Murad Khan v Fazl-e-Subhan PLD 1983 SC 82, and copy of the charge-sheet, statements of ASI Shahbaz Ali and PC Humayoon Baig recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.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.