| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 745 2021 SLD 745 2021 PCRLJ 285 |
Sindh High Court
Special Criminal A.T.J. Appeal No. 184 of 2019, decided on 15th December, 2020, Date of hearing: 15th December, 2020.
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE, ZULFIQAR AHMAD KHAN, JUSTICE
Hussain Bux Baloch, Additional Prosecutor General along with P.I. Ibadat Ali Shah. 1. SIP Ghulam Shabbir Gopang, 2. SIP Bagh Ali Junejo, 3. ASI Najaf Ali, 4. H.C. Rana Tariq.
Special Criminal A.T.J. Appeal No. 184 of 2019, decided on 15th December, 2020, Date of hearing: 15th December, 2020.
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE, ZULFIQAR AHMAD KHAN, JUSTICE
Hussain Bux Baloch, Additional Prosecutor General along with P.I. Ibadat Ali Shah. 1. SIP Ghulam Shabbir Gopang, 2. SIP Bagh Ali Junejo, 3. ASI Najaf Ali, 4. H.C. Rana Tariq.
ARSHAD
VS
THE STATE
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 7,27
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 324,353,34
Law: Sindh Arms Act, 2013
Section: 23(i)(a)
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----Ss. 7 27---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 353 34---Sindh Arms Act (V of 2013), S. 23(i)(a)---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, common intention, possession of unlicensed weapon, act of terrorism--- Defective investigation--- Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that during patrolling duty police party tried to intercept two suspicious persons on a motorcycle, they opened straight firing upon police with intent to commit their intentional murder and deterred them from discharging their lawful duties and official functions---In retaliation, police party also made fire shots upon the culprits in their self defence, consequently, one culprit sustained bullet injury, fell down on the ground and died lateron, while police managed to apprehend the other culprit/present accused---Prosecution case was that two Police Officials including two Investigating Officers were responsible for a defective investigation as well as failed to comply with the orders of the Trial Court and appellate court about disposal of case property, thus, liable to be penalized under S. 27 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997---Scope---Record showed that both the Investigating Officers submitted that they had not seized SMGs used in the alleged encounter, nor sent any official weapon used in encounter for Forensic Science Laboratory---Investigating Officer had not complied with trial courts order about disposal of case property, order of court had not been complied with till date---All the said factors clearly indicated that at the time of killing the accused by firing, the accused was not committing any robbery since he was driving motorcycle of his brother (as today alleged by Investigating Officer) with cash Rs.25,500/- and his own two mobile phones---Prosecution had not even produced CRO of the deceased before trial court or that court, thus it could not be ruled out that it was cold-blooded killing from point blank range at the time when there was no information about any criminal record of the deceased with the police party---Both the Investigating Officers confirmed…
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