MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1109 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.

MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State Ss. 365-a & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Kidnapping or abducting for extorting property, valuable securities, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Delay of about four hours and forty five minutes in lodging the FIR---Scope---accused were charged for kidnapping the friends of complainant for ransom---Record showed that the FIR was filed within hours of the incident and such prompt filing of the FIR ruled out the possibility of the complainant concocting a false case against the accused with the police or any other third party---Complainant had no enmity with the accused and had no reason to falsely implicate them in a case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against all the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State art. 22---Identification parade---Scope---Identification parade is only a corroborative piece of evidence and could not supersede reliable, trustworthy, confidence inspiring direct evidence. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State Contradictions--- Scope--- Contradic-tions minor in nature and not material and certainly not of such materiality so as to affect the prosecution case and the conviction of the accused were of no consequence. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State art. 22---Identification parade---Delay in conducting the test identification parade---Scope---Even a delay of over one year in holding the identification parade was not fatal if the identifier had correctly identified the accused. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State S. 365-a---Kidnapping for ransom---Scope---To be guilty of the offence under S. 365-a, P.P.C., it was not to be proved that a ransom was actually paid but only that a ransom demand was made. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR VS State Ss. 365-a & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 22---Kidnapping or abducting for extorting property, valuable securities, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Test identification parade---Scope---accused were charged for kidnapping the friends of complainant for ransom---Taxi driver, who was also abducted and detained in a room for twenty one days, picked out three persons at an identification parade as kidnappers---Said eye-witness was a natural witness and not a chance witness---Said witness had no enmity with the accused and had no reason to falsely implicate them---Evidence of said witness was not dented despite lengthy cross-examination and as such it was believable that said eye-witness had correctly identified all the accused as playing a role in his kidnapping for ransom along with the other abductees---Eye-witness/other abductee was abducted along with taxi driver---Despite a lapse of two years in giving his evidence from the incident in his evidence he corroborated eye-witness in all material respects---Said witness specifically stated that the kidnappers told him that they had kidnapped them for ransom and if no ransom was paid they would kill them---Same considerations applied to the said witness as for other eye-witness/abductee and for the same reasons believable that he had correctly identified the accused and he mentioned some of the persons who played a role in his kidnapping for ransom---Same considerations applied to the third abductee/eye-witness---Evidence of said witnesses corroborated each other in all material respects and at three separate identification parades every witness identified each of the accused as being involved in his kidnapping for ransom---Said witness had correctly identified all five accused who played a role in his kidnapping for ransom---another abductee/eye-witness gave the same evidence as eye-witnesses/abductees---Evidence of said witness corroborated each other in all material respects---Said witness stated in his evidence that he was the abductee who was not initially released with the other abductees but was kept in captivity because his parents had not paid the ransom---Said abductee was released after his parents had paid the ransom---However, despite identifying all the accused at the identification parade, he refused to do so in court and was declared hostile by the prosecution---another eye-witness who was the maternal uncle of an abductee, was not an abductee/eye-witness but was a witness to the ransom negotiations and an eye-witness to identifying one of the persons whome he paid the ransom amount---Judicial Magistrate, who conducted three separate identification parade of the accused who were picked up by the eye-witnesses, prepared and exhibited all the memos of identification parade, which confirmed that each of the eye-witnesses/abductees did identify each accused as per their evidence before the identification parade which he carried out---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that all the accused were guilty of kidnapping the abductees---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against all the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

MUHAMMAD SHAHID alias BAHADUR vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR