ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1012 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.

ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused pointed out the place of wardat---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Accused persons led the police to the place of wardat---Said fact that the accused persons could lead the police to the wardat was irrelevant as the police already knew where the wardat was---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal was allowed and accused were acquitted by setting aside convictions and sentences recorded by the Trial Court. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Ocular account---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by sole eye-witness---Said witness stated that he heard firing and saw three persons on two motorcycles one of whom made firing on a car and then they robbed the driver---Person in the car came out in an injured condition and he was shifted to hospital---Said witness picked out two accused persons with specific role at an identification parade before the Judicial Magistrate---Witness again picked out another accused with a specific role---According to his evidence, he was a driver but his employer was not examined nor was the location of house or office of employer disclosed---Eye-witness appeared to be a roving taxi driver---Eye-witness, in evidence, stated that there was light/darkness but things were visible---No light bulb was seized from the wardat---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against acquittal was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence--- Withholding material evidence---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Two other natural eye-witnesses who were on the prosecution witness list were dropped---Said witnesses would have been extremely important natural eye-witnesses in corroborating the evidence of sole eye-witness and in particular that of the correct identification of the accused persons, presumption could be drawn under Art. 129(g) Quun-e-Shahadat, 1984 that they would not have supported the prosecution case especially in terms of a correct identification---Prosecution had, therefore, for reasons best known to itself deliberately withhold the best evidence---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Medical evidence---Scope---Medical evidence could only reveal how the deceased died, what kind of weapon was used and the seat of the injuries---Medical evidence could not identify the person who inflicted the injuries. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of pistols on the pointation of accused---Reliance---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---After the arrest of accused persons following the alleged police encounter no wallet or mobile phone of the deceased or the eye-witness was found on the accused and thus there was no evidence to link them to the murder on their arrest---Question had arisen that as to why the accused would keep the pistols after the murder, which would incriminate them---Logic, commonsense and reason dictated that they would have disposed of such pistols---In fact the evidence revealed that the encounter in effect was one of ineffective firing where no one was injured which tended to suggest that no such encounter took place and the pistols might have been foisted on the accused---No recovery was made from co-accused, who was not arrested at the time of the encounter and who apparently made his escape good---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Description of accused not mentioned---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Although eye-witness in his statement under S.161, Cr.P.C. which was taken the next day, but he gave no hulia or description of any of the accused in the same---No description of the accused also appeared in the FIR who were stated to be unknown persons---Eye-witness was also not named in the FIR---Said witness in his evidence also stated that he never told the police that he could make a sketch of the accused which was in contradiction with the police evidence which stated that he and another eye-witness (who was not examined) made sketches of the accused persons which were not exhibited at trial---Witness did not know the accused persons prior to the incident and only got a fleeting glance of them from a distance of over twenty paces with indifferent light at best and during a chaotic and life threatening incident---Conviction could be based on the evidence of a sole eye-witness, however, based on the particular facts and circumstances of the case, it was found that even if the eye-witness was present at the time of the incident, he would not have been able to correctly, safely and reliably identify the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Benefit of doubt--- Principle---Prosecution must prove its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt and the benefit of doubt must go to the accused by way of right as opposed to concession. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Confession of accused before police---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter accused were arrested---Police in their evidence admitted that they had no idea who had committed the murder of the deceased until accused admitted whilst in police custody for the encounter and arm case that they had murdered the deceased, likewise accused whilst in jail custody in another case---Not only such confessions before the police were inadmissible in evidence but it did not appeal to logic, commonsense and reason that a person booked in an encounter and arms case would out of the blue confess to murder when there was no evidence against him for that offence which carried the capital penalty---No effort was made to get the confessing accused S.164, Cr.P.C. statements recorded before a Judicial Magistrate despite the accused was being produced before a Judicial Magistrate for an identification parade---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against accused was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI VS State Ss. 302, 324, 392, 353, 427 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.22---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, robbery, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Test identification parade---Delay of about one month in conducting the identification parade---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant during robbery, when police tried to arrest them, they made firing upon the police party, police party also made firing in retaliation, and thereafter the accused were arrested---Accused claimed that they were shown to the police prior to the identification parade which took place a month after the incident and with an unexplained delay of nine days after their arrest during which period two out of the three accused persons were kept in police custody---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

ABDUL AZIZ ANSARI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1012 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR