| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3095 2007 SLD 3095 2007 PLJ 443 |
Sindh High Court
Crl. A. Nos. D-65 and D-49 of 2004, decided on 5.9.2006.
RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI AND SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JJ.
Mr. Nizam-ud-Din Baloch, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Habib-ur-Rehman Shaikh, Asstt. A.G. for State.
Crl. A. Nos. D-65 and D-49 of 2004, decided on 5.9.2006.
RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI AND SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JJ.
Mr. Nizam-ud-Din Baloch, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Habib-ur-Rehman Shaikh, Asstt. A.G. for State.
SAEED AHMED---Appellant
VS
STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of I860)-- ----S. 302(b)--Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997),. S. 7(a)--West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13(d)--Appreciation of evidence--Benefit of doubt--Recorded serious enmity existed between the parties and all three eye-witnesses were closely related to each other--Ocular testimony in circumstances was interested, hostile and inimical to accused and before relying upon evidence of such witnesses, their evidence had to be corroborated from other piece of evidence--Statements of two PWs were recorded after delay of about 17 days and prosecution did not furnish any explanation for such delay--Stand taken by both said witnesses had been belied by evidence available on record and conduct of both witnesses appeared to be abnormal and unnatural and their such conduct, had created doubt about their presence at the place and time of incident--Evidence of recovery was in direct conflict with evidence of another PW--Record of investigation appeared to have been tampered with and changed so as to fit in the circumstances of the case and it appeared that investigation was changed for the purpose of preparing false record and to manipulate evidence so as to fit in the circumstances of the case--Evidence of other two PWs having not inspired confidence, no implicit reliance, in circumstances, could be placed on such type of evidence--Prosecution having failed to prove the oral evidence and recoveries beyond any reasonable doubt, case of prosecution was highly doubtful--Prosecution having failed to prove case against accused, appeal of accused against his conviction and sentence, was allowed. [Pp. 448, 449 & 450] A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H & I Judgment Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, J--Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 8-7-2003 the complainant Khadim Hussain, his brother Ghulam Yasin, relative Ghulam Abbas were present at the shop of Mistri Abbas Pathan. At about 8 p.m. deceased Iqbal elder brother of the complainant who was a police constable reached at the said place on his motorcycle. In the meantime the appellant Saeed, absconding accused Shamsuddin alias Shams armed with kalashnikov. Altaf, Baharo,…
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