ALI SHER BANGULANI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1655 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.

ALI SHER BANGULANI VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly--- Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---Accused were charged that they along with their co-accused made indiscriminate firing upon the police party, due to which one Police Constable died whereas three were injured, however police also made firing in retaliation and resultantly one of the accused person was hit and died---Defence objected that injured Police Constable had alleged to have received firearm injury at the hands of other accused, while the medical report stated that he did not suffer any firearm injury, therefore, the case of other accused required deeper appreciation of the evidence on record---However, when the prosecutor was confronted with such position, he was unable to controvert the factual position that from the provisional Medico-Legal Certificate issued by the Medico-Legal Officer in respect of injured Police Constable it revealed that the inured Police Constable had sustained lacerated wound and not firearm injury---About the said wound it had not been stated by Medico-Legal Officer that the same was caused by firearm or that it was through and through like the injuries sustained by deceased Police Constable---Thus, there was no evidence to prove that injured Police Constable sustained firearm injury caused by the other accused---Since other accused had caused no injury to deceased Police Constable or to any other person of the police party; however, he was captured by the police on spot along with offensive weapon, therefore, said accused was acquitted of the charge under S. 302, P.P.C.---Per prosecution case, said accused had allegedly caused gunshot injuries to injured Police Constable, but the medical evidence as available on record did not support the case of prosecution, therefore, charge to the extent of S. 324, P.P.C., against the other accused had also not been established---Consequently, the sentence awarded to the accused in terms of S.324, P.P.C. was also set aside---As far as sentence awarded to the accused in terms of S. 353, P.P.C., was concerned, he was apprehended by the police on the spot along with offensive weapon, hence prosecution had established it's charge against him to the extent of S. 353, P.P.C.---Thus, conviction and sentence of the other accused under S. 353, P.P.C. was maintained---Appeal in respect of said accused was partly allowed to the extent of his conviction awarded under Ss. 302 & 324, P.P.C. and the sentence awarded to him for the said offences were set aside, whereas the conviction and the sentence awarded to him for the offence under S. 353, P.P.C. was maintained. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1655 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ALI SHER BANGULANI VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Plea of previous empty not established---Accused were charged that they along with their co-accused made indiscriminate firing upon the police party, due to which one Police Constable died whereas three were injured, however police also made firing in retaliation and resultantly one of the accused person was hit and died---Defence objected that accused were arrayed in the case due to enmity---Said objection was a wild and bald allegation and was not supported by any evidence---Even, none of the accused persons, in their statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C., took such plea and they only stated that the police arrayed them to show their efficiency---Record showed that a number of cases were registered against the accused persons, but the same could not prove any enmity between police and the accused persons and, at the most, it could be said that the prosecution was unable to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt in those cases---No plausible explanation as to why the police would involve innocent persons in place of the real culprits, as death of Police Constable had been proved to be unnatural---Appeal against conviction to the extent of accused in question was dismissed. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1655 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ALI SHER BANGULANI VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly--- Appreciation of evidence--- Recovery of weapon of offence and crime empties---Scope---Accused were charged that they along with their co-accused made indiscriminate firing upon the police party, due to which one Police Constable died whereas three were injured, however police also made firing in retaliation and resultantly one of the accused person was hit and died---Report of Forensic Science Laboratory revealed that the Laboratory received one 7.62 mm bore (SMG) rifle with magazine which was recovered from accused and one 12 bore SBBL Shot Gun (number rubbed) recovered from other accused with some empties---As per the laboratory report, six 7.62 mm bore crime empties were fired from the above-mentioned rifle recovered from accused---In such state of affairs, it became crystal clear that Police Constable was hit by the burst fired by accused from his Kalashnikov, which caused his death---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction to the extent of accused in question was dismissed. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1655 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ALI SHER BANGULANI VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Appreciation of evidence---Police witnesses, evidence of---Accused were charged that they along with their co-accused made indiscriminate firing upon the police party, due to which one Police Constable died whereas three were injured, however police also made firing in retaliation and resultantly one of the accused person was hit and died---Defence objected that the injured witnesses as well as the deceased were from police and hence biasness on the part of police could not be ruled out---Held, that, it was not a rule of law that in such cases police could not be entrusted with the investigation of the case---However, nothing had been shown or brought on record that the accused persons ever raised such plea before the concerned court by moving an application for transfer of the investigation to any other agency---On the contrary, co-accused was the person, who made indiscriminate firing upon police party, clearly admitting that there was police encounter involving those persons---In police encounters and, particularly those encounters which take place in remote areas, it was police personnel against the accused and there was no third party involved---Thus, naturally the witnesses would be Police Officials only and if their evidence was not believed, particularly when one of their party members was killed in the encounter and others sustained firearm injuries, then the accused could not be convicted at all for their act---Hence, said plea had no force and was rejected---Nothing abnormal was found calling for interference by High Court---Appeal against conviction to the extent of accused in question was dismissed.

ALI SHER BANGULANI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 1655 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR