ZAMIR HUSSAIN SHAH vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a bail application filed by the applicant, Zamir Hussain Shah, facing trial in Crime No. 90 of 2000 registered at Police Station Gambat under sections 302, 120-B, 109, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question concerns whether bail can be granted when the primary evidence against the accused is an extra-judicial confession or confessional statement made before police officers and witnesses, allegedly lacking corroboration. The court held that extra-judicial confessions are a weak type of evidence that cannot form the sole basis for conviction in capital charges without tangible corroboratory evidence, making it a fit case for further inquiry. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application and granted bail to the applicant subject to furnishing security. The key principle laid down is that uncorroborated extra-judicial confessions constitute weak evidence warranting the grant of bail pending trial in capital cases.
- Whether an extra-judicial confession without corroboration is sufficient ground to deny bail in a capital case?
- What is the evidentiary value of a confessional statement made before a police officer?
- Can an uncorroborated extra-judicial confession be made the basis for conviction?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 120-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. The applicant is facing trial in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gambat in connection with Crime No,90 of 2000 Police Station, Gambat registered on 6-6-2000 under sections 302, 120-B,109 and 34, P.P.C.
2. It is contended by Mr. Awan, learned counsel for the applicant that it is an un-witnessed incident as is evident from the F.I.R. and the only evidence available with the prosecution against the present applicant is the alleged confessional statement of co-accused Ghulam Shabeer made before the Inspector CIA in presence of P.Ws. Ashique, Abdul Kareem and Himat Ali. The learned counsel has, therefore, argued that in the first instance the said statement being an admission of guilt before a police officer has no evidentiary value. Furthermore, at the most it can be considered to be an extra-judicial' confession before the witnesses which itself is a weak type of evidence in the absence of any corroboratory evidence and cannot be relied upon for the purpose of conviction.
3. He has further argued that there is nothing available on record or with the prosecution to corroborate the said extra-judicial confession. He has, therefore, prayed that it is a fit case for grant of bail Mr. Abdul Sattar Soomro. learned State counsel has not been able to point out any further piece of evidence collected by. the prosecution apart from the said extra-judicial confession.
4. I have given due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record made available before me.
5. In view of the un-controverted statement of Mr. Awan and further keeping in view the well-settled proposition of law that extra-judicial confessions are weak type of evidence and cannot be made basis for conviction in case of capital charge unless corroborated by some other tangible piece of evidence. I find it to be a case for grant of bail. In some what identical circumstances bail was granted in the case of Mir Hassan Malik v. State (1999 SCM R 1377) by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan.
6. Resultantly this bail application is allowed. Bail is granted to the applicant Zamir Hussain Shah in the sum -of Rs,2.50,000 (Rs,two lacs and fifty thousand only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.