Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7-H

Law: Sindh Arms Act, 2013

Section: 24

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----S. 7-H---Sindh Arms Act (V of 2013), S. 24---Act of terrorism, possessing unlicensed weapon---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that accused demanded Bhatha on phone calls from the complainant---Accused and co-accused visited complainant's village and in his absence made the same demand from his sons---Record showed that Mobile phone SIM was issued in the name of accused---Prosecution had not collected any material through which it would be established that said SIM was actually in use of the accused---Complainant and Investigating Officer in their deposition admitted that the mobile phone, which was produced as case property and allegedly on which the messages were received, was without SIM; evidently no massage could be received on that phone---Neither any mobile phone nor the SIM were recovered from the possession of the accused at the time of his arrest or afterward---Prosecution witness in his deposition had admitted that the complaining party was well aware of the accused and they knew him by his name, alias name and parentage but the complainant did not disclose the parentage and alias name of accused in FIR--- Circumstances established doubt in the prosecution case, benefit of which would resolve in favour of accused persons---Accused, in circumstances, was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by Trial Court. (b) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----S. 7-H---Sindh Arms Act (V of 2013), S. 24---Act of terrorism, possessing unlicensed weapon---Appreciation of evidence--- Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Effect---Witnesses were not in agreement about the numbers of houses in the village---Former said that there were 20/25 houses while the latter said that there were 200 houses---Said witnesses were not in agreement about their association with the complainant at the time of lodging the FIR---Both the witnesses deposed that their statements under S.164, Cr.P.C. were recorded on 9.8.2014 but actually the same were recorded on 11.8.2014---Both the witnesses were not in agreement with complainant regarding his time of returning to village…

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