YASEEN vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 54 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.

YASEEN VS State Ss. 302, 337-J, 506(2) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, causing hurt by means of poison, criminal intimidation, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt--- Night time occurrence---Source of light---Un-natural conduct of witnesses---Effect---Prosecution case was that accused and co-accused committed murder of brother of the complainant---Allegedly, the complainant and witnesses went to the house of the deceased at 12.30 (night)---Said witnesses had stated to have seen accused and co-accused persons killing the deceased in electric bulb light---Complainant who was also the eye-witness of the incident, did not support the prosecution case, as such, he was declared hostile by prosecution---Record showed that complainant through his application, which was available on record, stated that he had forgiven the accused and recorded his no objection if the accused would be released by the court---Later, complainant during arguments submitted that he did not give any statement with regard to identification of the accused before the Trial Court---In view of the evidence of complainant and his application, available on record, his conduct appeared to be dubious, as such, contents of FIR could not be safely relied upon---Notably, at the time of alleged incident the electric bulb was ON and the complainant party had seen the incident in the light of electric bulb but during investigation neither the said bulb was secured from the place of incident nor it had been produced in evidence by the Investigating Officer---If complainant and other witnesses were present at the place of occurrence then why they did not stop the accused or showed their resistance although they were related to each other---Said aspect of the case led that perhaps the incident had not taken place in a manner as stated in FIR---Case file revealed that the complainant party arrived at the place of incident at 12:30 a.m. (night) but nothing was on record to show as to why complainant party went to the house of deceased in late night hours and for what purpose---Record also revealed that the alleged incident took place inside the house in a room of the deceased whereas site plan disclosed that the dead body was available at the verandah of the house and it was shifted to the hospital by Police Constable, which was mentioned in column of the post-mortem report---Record was silent as to why the complainant party, near relative to the deceased, did not shift the dead body to hospital by themselves---Said aspect, too, created doubt in the prosecution case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

YASEEN vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 54 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported