PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

WALEED SHAH vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 1 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 PCrLJN 1 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
WALEED SHAH vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

WALEED SHAH VS State Ss. 302(b), 506(ii), 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, criminal intimidation, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with co-accused made firing upon the brother of complainant, who was hit and died---Evidence of eye-witnesses revealed that there were noticeable contradictions in their deposition on very crucial points---At the very start the complainant in his examination-in-chief had made exaggerations and improvements to the effect that he had shown presence of all the six persons besides himself and deceased by deposing that at morning time he, deceased and four other persons came to town---Contents of FIR showed that complainant had shown presence of only four persons---Son of complainant/witness had also made exaggeration in respect of number of persons present at the place of incident---Said witness had also shown presence of six persons---Furthermore, the FIR and deposition of complainant disclosed the time of incident as 06.00 a.m.---Son of complainant/witness contradicted them by showing the time of incident as 05.15 a.m.---Complainant in his examination-in-chief had deposed that he showed place of vardat to police at about 07:00 to 07.30 a.m., whereas mashirnama of inspection of place of vardat showed its time as 07.30 to 08.10 a.m.---According to evidence of complainant and contents of mashirnama the place of incident was shown to police by complainant, whereas mashir of inspection of place of incident had deposed that place of vardat was shown to police by some other person---Said contradictions were not minor in nature and were serious and created doubt regarding the happening of the episode within sight of witnesses---In particular, presence of both the witnesses of ocular account i.e. complainant and his son at the place of occurrence was not free from doubts---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English