SHAHZAD AHMED vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 101 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

SHAHZAD AHMED VS State Ss. 324, 353 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, common intention, possession of illegal weapons, acts of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that police received spy information with regard to presence of the accused for the purpose of committing robbery and dacoity---On said information police reached at pointed place and accused persons, who after seeing police party, coming towards them, started firing upon them with an intention to commit their murder and in retaliation police party also made some fire shots upon accused persons, who received fire arm injuries on their legs and fell down and were apprehended by police in injured condition---Record showed that the encounter was continued for about seven minutes with sophisticated weapons at the distance of 20-25 yards but no police person had received any fire arm injury---accused alleged that in fact no police encounter took place as they were involved in false cases by the police after causing fire arm injuries at their knees before the date of alleged incident just to show fake police encounter---If the alleged encounter took place at the distance of 20 to 25 yards then question arose that how at such long distance the accused received injuries at their knees---Registration number of police mobile, whereby police party went for patrolling on the day of alleged incident and same was allegedly hit with fire shot on its front wind screen during encounter, was neither mentioned in the entry of the roznamcha register nor in the FIR or memo of arrest and recovery and even in evidence, which put the movement of police on the day of alleged incident shrouded in doubt---admittedly, Investigating Officer did not obtain the blood-stained earth from the place of incident---No blood-stained trousers/ shalwars of the accused was recovered and sent to Chemical Examiner to show that actually they received injuries and blood on it was of human---allegedly, police recovered Rs. 180/- from the possession of accused and Rs.3507/- from the possession of co-accused, but complainant of the case did not mention denomination/type of currency in the memo of arrest and recovery as well statements under S.161, Cr.P.C.---admittedly, the alleged incident took place in the populated area, but complainant did not obtain private mashirs to witness the event---No explanation in that regard from prosecution side was available to strengthen its case---No evidence and proof was available on record that at the time of alleged incident, accused were indulged in committing dacoity---Evidence of prosecution witnesses was not trustworthy and confidence inspiring and contradictory with each other on material particulars of the case, therefore, their evidence could not be safely relied upon for maintaining the conviction---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

SHAHZAD AHMED vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 101 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported