Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 2268 2015 SLD 2268 2015 YLR 2255
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 89, 92 and 96 of 2012, decided on 20th July, 2013. DATE of hearing: 18th July, 2013.
FAROOQ ALI CHANNA AND AFTAB AHMED GORAR, JJ
Abdul Haque Odho, Umrah Khan Yousufzai and Sahab Khan Kanasro for Appellants. Abdul Rehman Kolachi A.P.G. for the State

NIAZ alias NIAZZO and others

VS

The STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 365-A, 324, 353, 148 & 149---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7---Kidnapping or abduction, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, rioting, common object and act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Star independent public witness, had not supported the case of prosecution and had narrated a different story---Said witness did not identify accused persons before the Trial Court---Nothing had come on surface helpful to the prosecution to prove the charge against accused persons---Trial Court had convicted accused persons relying upon the evidence of Police Officials---If the occurrence was witnessed by a public witness besides the Police personnel, and the said public witness denied the occurrence to have taken place at all, the evidence of Police personnel should be above board, confidence inspiring, and not only sufficient to prove the charge, but to rebut the evidence simultaneously furnished by public witness denying the occurrence---Prosecution case was that there was exchange of firing for 15 minutes between Police personnel and notorious dacoits, they both were presumed to be expert shooters, but no one from either side had sustained fire-arm injury---Mashirnama of wardat, also did not show any damage to Police mobiles, which had created doubt in the alleged incident of encounter---Impugned judg-ment of the Trial Court was set aside and accused were acquitted, in circumstances. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Evidence led by prosecution leaving room for doubt as to identity of accused, and reflecting on credibility of prosecution witness, accused would be entitled to the benefit of such doubt, not as a matter of grace and concession, but as a matter of right. ORDER FAROOQ ALI CHANNA, J.---By this common judgment we intend to dispose of three criminal appeals, referred to above filed by the appellants Allah Bux, Gulzar, Ali Hassan and Niaz alias Niazoo against the same judgment dated 30-11-2012 passed by learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court, Khairpur Mirs, in Spl. Case No.62/2011 culminated FIR No.118/2011,…
🔒
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