Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 709 2014 SLD 709 2014 YLR 1479
Sindh High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No. S-81, Criminal Appeal No. S-104 andCriminal Jail Appeal No. S-112 of 2012, decided on04-02-2014. Date of hearing: 24-01-2014.
SADIQ HUSAIN BHATTI, JUSTICE
Fayyaz Ahmed Soomro and Ali Mutahir Shar for Appellants.Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, D.P.G. for the State.

ABDUL RAZZAQ AND 3 OTHERSVS THE STATE

Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 148 & 149---Qatl-e-amd, rioting, common object---Appreciation of evidence---Occurrence was a night time incident and there was no source of light---Place of incident was surrounded by Banana crops and houses, but Police did not record the statement of any person from the neighbourhood---Long-standing enmity existed between the parties, strong corroboration was needed to filter the evidence of interested and inimical witnesses---Witnesses had not given the actual time of lodging the F.I.R.---Complainant lodged the F.I.R. after postmortem examination and receiving the dead body, with the consultation of 3/4 Police Officials---Police did not record the statement from the persons who were present at the hotel where occurrence took place, which was most important---Prosecution did not examine the hotel keeper, whose statement was recorded by the Police---Prosecution witness, who was also the alleged eye-witness of incident, was given up at the behest of complainant--All had shown that trial had not been fairly conducted, and important evidence had been suppressed---Prosecution had not proved the motive of incident either orally or through documents---No recovery of crime weapon was made from any accused, simply empties allegedly recovered from place of incident, could not prove that those were fired by accused---Eighty seven empties were recovered by Police from place of vardat, but no ballistic report was produced by prosecution---No crime weapon having been recovered from any accused, it was not possible that empties were matched and report became positive---No other corroborative evidence was on record to support the testimony of two prosecution witnesses---Co-accused who had been shown as mastermind, was acquitted by the Trial Court on the same set of evidence, while other one was convicted---Possibility of mistaken identity coupled with major contradictions in the evidence of witnesses could not be excluded, which had made the case doubtful---Prosecution having failed to prove the case against accused persons beyond shadow of doubt, their conviction and sentences were set aside, they were acquitted of the charges…
🔒
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