Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 3038 2006 SLD 3038 2006 PLD 206
Sindh High Court
Spl. A.T.As. Nos. 29, 30 and Confirmation Case No. 13 of 2004, decided on 23rd January, 2006, DATE of hearing: 18th January, 2006.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO AND RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JJ
M. R. Syed for Appellants. Habib Ahmed, A.A.G. for the State.

ATTAULLAH alias QASIM

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----Ss. 7(a) & 7(c)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-F(6)/34---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13(c)---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution, without assigning any reason, had withheld the best evidence of the natural, independent and injured prosecution witness whose presence at the scene of incident could not be doubted, and therefore a presumption could fairly be raised that if he had been produced in the Court, he would not have supported the prosecution case---Evidence of the eye-witnesses was in direct conflict with the evidence of the complainant and the same had been improved at the trial even to the extent of changing the initial story of the prosecution---Police had recorded the statement of the witness after a delay of five days which was not explained and such testimony could not be relied upon---Sketch of the accused was not duly proved on record by producing its author in the Court---Eye-witnesses could not possibly have seen the faces of the accused riding a motorcycle, particularly when according to the complainant, one of them had muffled his face and the other was wearing a helmet---Although one eye-witness had claimed to have identified the accused who had fired at the injured, yet no identification test was held for his identification through the said witness---Matching report of the pistol allegedly recovered from the accused with the crime empties was of no avail to prosecution, as the pistol was not produced in evidence in Court to show that the same was sent to Ballistic Expert and the report pertained to the said pistol---Benefit of doubt was extended to the accused in circumstances and they were acquitted accordingly. Saeed Muhammad Shah v. State 1993 SCMR 550; Sahib Gul v. Ziarat Gul 1976 SCMR 236; Muhammad Sadiq v. State PLD 1960 .SC 223; Abdul Sattar v. Shamim Akhtar 1997 SCMR 457 and Haroon v. State 1995.SCMR 1627 ref. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 129, Illust. (g)---Anit-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss.7(a) & 7(c)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-F(vi)/34---Presumption against withholding of best evidence---Where best piece of evidence is available…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492