HABIB ULLAH vs State S — 2023 MLD 1961 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.

HABIB ULLAH VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Defence plea---Accused was charged for committing murder of his wife/sister of the complainant by inflicting hammer blows---If any doubt in the prosecution case had crept in because of the lapses pointed out by the defence, it was overwhelmingly wiped out when one seen what the accused said in his S. 342, Cr.P.C. statement---Accused lived in his house with his young wife and four small children---Deceased wife was hammered to death in the middle of the night in the bed room they shared---Accused-husband ran away immediately, leaving his four small children behind, in the middle of the night and the children woke up to a mother who had been brutally hammered to death and a father who ran away---Trauma that accused left the little children to deal with all alone was shameful and despicable, to say the least---Accused did not attend the last rites of his wife, in fact, he absconded since that very day for a period of seven years---When asked about his abscondence at trial accused said that he had no knowledge about the case---Said fact was an obvious lie as earlier in his statement accused had already admitted that he knew of the incident and that the reason he did not attend the funeral was because he was afraid that the police would arrest him---While claiming that a false case had been registered against him, accused went on to acknowledge that he had taken no steps to clear his name---As regard why his own daughter would testify against him, accused was of the view that his daughter was influenced by her uncle---Said fact was simply not believable---Accused could also not come up with the explanation as to who had or as a matter of fact would have wanted death of deceased---Man such as the accused could be given no concessions---In particular, concessions that were based on sole technicalities and which did not take into account ground realities---Circumstances established that no reasons were found to interfere with the conviction recorded by the Trial Court---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

HABIB ULLAH vs State S — 2023 MLD 1961 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD