| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4088 = 2026 SLD 4088 |
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Appeal No.82 of 2018
Presented By: INAAM AMEEN MINHAS, J
Appellant by: Mr.Sohail Ikram and Mr. Husnain Sohail, Advocates.
Respondents by: Ms. Huma Tariq, SPP along with Muhammad Sadiq, SI. Date of Hearing: 22.01.2026.
Criminal Appeal No.82 of 2018
Presented By: INAAM AMEEN MINHAS, J
Appellant by: Mr.Sohail Ikram and Mr. Husnain Sohail, Advocates.
Respondents by: Ms. Huma Tariq, SPP along with Muhammad Sadiq, SI. Date of Hearing: 22.01.2026.
Syed Hassan Jan
VERSUS
State and another
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302(b),302,324, 353,186, 34
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 544-A
Summary The appeal challenged the judgment of the Anti-Terrorism Court, Islamabad, which had convicted the appellant under Section 302(b) PPC for the murder of ASI Muhammad Riaz and sentenced him to life imprisonment along with payment of Rs. 500,000 compensation under Section 544-A Cr.P.C. The prosecution case was that after committing a dacoity at Ravi Money Changers, the appellant and his accomplices were intercepted by police in G-9 Markaz, Islamabad. During the encounter, the accused opened fire on police officials, resulting in the death of ASI Muhammad Riaz and injuries to HC Rizwan Mustafa and three shopkeepers. While the co-accused escaped, the appellant was apprehended at the scene with a pistol. The prosecution relied upon eyewitness testimony, the statement of the injured police official, medical evidence, recovery of the weapon, and forensic reports linking the appellant to the crime. The Islamabad High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction, holding that the prosecution had proved the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court observed that the testimony of the injured witness and eyewitnesses remained consistent, reliable, and corroborated by medical and forensic evidence. It rejected the defense arguments regarding non-production of some injured witnesses, alleged contradictions in evidence, lack of recovery, defective identification, and mala fide investigation. The Court reiterated that the quality of evidence is more important than the number of witnesses and that a formal identification parade is unnecessary where an accused is apprehended at the scene of occurrence. Finding no illegality, misreading, or non-reading of evidence in the trial court’s judgment, the Court maintained the conviction and dismissed the appeal. JUDGMENT SHEET INAAM AMEEN MINHAS, J.- This appeal assails the judgment dated 10.05.2018 (“Impugned Judgment”), passed by the learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court-I, Islamabad (“Trial Court”), whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced u/s 302(b) PPC to life imprisonment and held liable to pay Rs.500,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased as…