LAKHMIR vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 57 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.

LAKHMIR VS State Ss. 302, 324, 114, 337-a(i), 337-F(i) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-mudihah---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that on the instigation of accused, other co-accused attacked upon the complainant party, as a result thereof, father of complainant was hit by repeater shot and died at the spot whereas, four persons were injured---Record showed that deceased died due to sustaining the firearm injuries at the hands of proclaimed offender---admittedly accused was empty handed at the time of alleged incident and he did not cause any injury or hurt either to deceased or any prosecution witness---Co-accused who allegedly caused lathi blows/injuries to prosecution witnesses had been acquitted by the Trial Court and the complainant, though, filed appeal against his acquittal but the same was dismissed---Record transpired that co-accused though caused hatchet blows/injuries to deceased as well as witness was convicted and sentenced for years imprisonment---On filing appeal his sentence was reduced to one already undergone, which judgment had not been challenged either by the complainant or the State, hence it attained finality---Co-accused, who caused lathi blows/injuries, to witnesses/injuries had been acquitted by the Trial Court whereas co-accused who caused hatchet injuries to deceased as well as witness had been awarded sentence for five years---accused was awarded life imprisonment without assigning any valid reason---accused was about 74 years of age and he was in jail since 28 09.2018---Case and claim of accused as stated in his statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C, was that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case by the complainant on account of petty dispute over landed property---Enmity in between the complainant and accused had not been disputed---accused was facing trial since 2012---Only the role attributed to accused was that of instigation and no unimpeachable evidence was available on record to prove the guilt of accused as instigator---Merely saying by complainant party that the accused was present at the time of incident and he instigated to co-accused without any documentary not enough to connect the accused with the commission of alleged offence---False implication of accused could not be ruled out, in circumstances---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

LAKHMIR vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 57 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported