Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1732 2018 SLD 1732 2018 PCRLJ 1064
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. D-109, D-110, D-112, D-118, D-119 of 2016, decided & hearing on 08-02-2017.
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, JUSTICE, RASHEED AHMED SOOMRO, JUSTICE
Mian Taj Muhammad Keerio for Appellant No.1 (in Criminal Appeal No. D-109 of 2016). Shoukat Ali Kaka for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. D-110 of 2016 and Criminal Jail Appeal No. D-111 of 2016). Mian Taj Muhammad Keerio and Shoukat Ali Kaka for Appel

SAJJAD ALIAS SAJJU AND OTHERS

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----Ss. 6 & 7---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 394, 353 & 34---Terrorism, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, voluntary causing hurt in committing robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty---Appreciation of evidence---Complainant (police) alleged that three unknown accused persons fired straight upon a constable (injured) who was posted as guard at the bungalow of an Additional District and Sessions Judge---During investigation accused persons were arrested but after their arrest no identification parade was held---Identification of the accused on headlights of vehicle and street light was weak source of identification and in peculiar circumstances of case it was highly doubtful---Identification of the culprits before the Trial Court was unsafe to rely for conviction---Investigating Officer arrested the accused persons on the ground that he had spy information that accused persons were involved in the commission of the offence---Injured had deposed that in fact there were six accused persons but had not described the features of the accused in his statement under S.161, Cr.P.C.---Evidence of injured was not straightforward and confidence inspiring---Injured witness would not be relied upon ipso facto because of injuries but it had to be examined that whether the evidence was trustworthy and confidence inspiring---No piece of evidence had been produced by the prosecution to connect the accused persons in the commission of the offence---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Azhar Mehmood v. The State 2017 SCMR 135 and Said Ahmad v. Zammured Hussain 1981 SCMR 795 rel. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 24---Source of identification---Value---Identification of the accused on headlights of vehicle and street light was weak source of identification. (c) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 22---No identification parade held---Effect---Identification of the culprits before the Trial Court was unsafe to rely for conviction. Azhar Mehmood v. The State 2017 SCMR 135 rel. (d) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Arts. 3 & 17--- Testimony of injured witness---…
🔒
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