Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 843 2025 SLD 843 = 2025 PCRLJ 470
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. S-01 of 2024, decided on 6th May, 2024.
Before Amjad Ali Sahito, J
Rai Singh Sodho for Appellant No. 1. Mir Ali Bux Talpur for Appellants Nos. 2 and 3. Shahzado Saleem, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh for the State. Zaheer-ud-Nohri for the Complainant.

QALANDAR and 2 others---Appellants

VERSUS

The STATE---Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 324,506(ii),337A(i),337F(i),337F(iii),114,34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 324, 506(ii), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(iii), 114 & 34---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, ghayr-jaifahmutalahimah, criminal intimidation, abettor present at the time of occurrence, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Accused were charged for making firing upon the cousins of complainant, due to which they sustained firearm injuries, and accused allegedly left the place of occurrence while issuing murderous threats---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by eye-witnesses/injured, who had received injuries at the hands of accused persons---Medical certificates of the injured persons produced by Medical Officer also proved that the injured were referred to him on the date of the incident; he examined them on the same date and found multiple injures of same kind of weapon---In the instant matter, the complainant, injured witness as well as all other eye-witnesses of the incident had fully explained the date, time, place of incident, manner of occurrence and involvement of the accused persons---From the perusal of the evidence of the injured/eye-witnesses and other private witnesses, it appeared that they could not be termed as chance witnesses rather would fall within the category of natural witnesses---From the appreciation of evidence, it was crystal clear that the prosecution remained successful in bringing cogent and unimpeachable direct evidence well supported and corroborated by the medical version against the accused persons---Evidence of the witnesses and injured witnesses could not be discarded merely because they were close relatives inter-se particularly their presence at the place of occurrence was obvious as the incident took place in broad daylight---Circumstances established that the prosecution had successfully established its case against two accused persons beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction of said two accused persons was dismissed, in circumstances.(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 324, 506(ii), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(iii), 114 & 34---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register