| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 960 2023 SLD 960 2023 YLR 1012 |
Sindh High Court
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 102 to 105 of2019 and Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeal No. 27of 2020, decided on 21st September, 2021. Date of hearing:14th September, 2021.
Before Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Irshad Ali Shah, JJ
Raj Ali Wahid Kunwar for Appellants (in Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 102 to 105 of 2019 and Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeal No.27 of 2020). Ali Haider Saleem, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh for the State (in Special Criminal A
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 102 to 105 of2019 and Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeal No. 27of 2020, decided on 21st September, 2021. Date of hearing:14th September, 2021.
Before Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Irshad Ali Shah, JJ
Raj Ali Wahid Kunwar for Appellants (in Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 102 to 105 of 2019 and Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeal No.27 of 2020). Ali Haider Saleem, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh for the State (in Special Criminal A
ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI and others---Appellants
VERSUS
The STATE---Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302,324,392,353,427,34
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by sole eye-witness---Said witness stated that he heard firing and saw three persons on two motorcycles one of whom made firing on a car and then they robbed the driver---Person in the car came out in an injured condition and he was shifted to hospital---Said witness picked out two accused persons with specific role at an identification parade before the Judicial Magistrate---Witness again picked out another accused with a specific role---According to his evidence, he was a driver but his employer was not examined nor was the location of house or office of employer disclosed---Eye-witness appeared to be a roving taxi driver---Eye-witness, in evidence, stated that there was light/darkness but things were visible---No light bulb was seized from the wardat---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against acquittal was allowed, in circumstances. Muhammad Umair alias Bhutto v. State 2018 MLD 1196; Jalal Hassan v. Ameer Hamza Awan and 2 others 2019 MLD 1170; Mst. Sughra Begum and another v. Qaiser Pervez and others 2015 SCMR 1142; Khurram Jalali v. The State 2017 PCr.LJ 19; Kanwar Anwaar Ali, Special Judicial Magistrate: In the matter of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.183 of 2019 of Criminal Appeal No.259 of 2018, decided on 22nd February, 2019; Shakeel and another v. The State 2019 MLD 1554; Hayatullah v. The State 2018 SCMR 2092; Taj Bahadur alias Taji and another v. The State 1997 MLD 1072; Bashir Ahmed v. The State 2004 PCr.LJ…
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