Before Sir A. Rahman, A. C. J. and M. Khurhsid Zaman, J.
Mst. BAKHAT BANO wife of FEROZE KHAN – Convict Appellant
versus
THE CROWN – Respondent

Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 1948, decide don 6th July 1948, from the order, dated 20th November 1947, passed by Session Judge, Jhelum.

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 164 and 364 – Provisions disregarded in recording confession – High Court, Lahore, Rules and Orders, Chapter XIII, Volume III – Punjab Government circular letter No. 6091 – J-36/39829 (H.Judicial), dated 19th December 1936 – Directions not complied with – Confession, held no duly made and therefore, inadmissible.

Confession is inadmissible in evidence unless the Magistrate is found to have made real and substantial inquiries which he was bound to do as to its voluntary nature before recording it. [p. 72].

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), S. 533 – Irregularities in recording a confession when can be cured.

Irregularities in recording a confession can be cured under section 533 Criminal Procedure Code. But it is only when the Court is satisfied that the confession had been made duly although it was not recorded duly. In other words the matter is one of substance and not merely that of form. [p. 73].

Appellant through Jail.

Muhammad Sharif, Assistant to Advocate General, for Respondent.