| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 207 2020 SLD 207 2020 PCRLJ 96 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No. D-41 of 2014, decision Dated: 01-10-2018. Hearing Dated: 26-09-2018.
MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, JUSTICE AMJAD ALI SAHITO, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Shamsuddin Rajper
Respondent(s) by: Abdul Rehman Kolachi, Deputy Prosecutor-General
Criminal Jail Appeal No. D-41 of 2014, decision Dated: 01-10-2018. Hearing Dated: 26-09-2018.
MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, JUSTICE AMJAD ALI SAHITO, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Shamsuddin Rajper
Respondent(s) by: Abdul Rehman Kolachi, Deputy Prosecutor-General
NIAZ ALI RAJPER
VS
THE STATE
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,324,353,365A
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 342,382B
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 2(n),7
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 365-A, 324 & 353---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Kidnapping or abduction for extorting property, valuable security etc. attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that two accused persons, duly armed with TT pistols, forcibly taking away the son of complainant, soon as both accused had seen the police party, started firing upon police directly with intention to kill them---Police party, in retaliation, started firing and such encounter continued for about 05-minutes and during which police party recovered the boy and also arrested accused along with a pistol, whereas, other culprit succeeded to escape away---Ocular account of the case was furnished by witnesses including complainant and abductee---Present accused-appellant was nominated in the FIR with specific role that, he along with his unidentified accomplice forcibly abducted child aged about 10 years from Government, Primary School with intention to extort ransom amount---Said abductee was recovered by the police during the encounter and present accused-appellant was also apprehended at the spot with a pistol, used in the commission of offence---Evidence of complainant and eye-witnesses was supported by official witness, who had clearly deposed to have seen and identified the present accused-appellant at the spot while he along with his accomplice was forcibly taking away the abductee---Accused was apprehended at the spot along with unlicensed pistol, which was also supported by the evidence of Investigating Officer---All the witnesses were cross-examined by the defence at length---Witnesses remained consistent on material points---Abductee had narrated complete story, manner of his abduction, demand of ransom of Rs.500,000/- and recovery by police which was apparently natural and confidence inspiring---Said abductee had identified accused-appellant, who remained involved in the commission of the offence---Accused-appellant had not claimed any direct or indirect enmity against the abductee for his false involvement in…
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