SAJID ALI vs State S — 2023 YLR 1675 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.

SAJID ALI VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Discrepancies in the prosecution evidence---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Record showed that the incident had not taken place in a manner as stated by the prosecution---Strong circumstances in the prosecution case were found which exposed reasonable doubt and the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused for the offences charged beyond a reasonable doubt keeping the assertion of the FIR in juxtaposition of the evidence adduced by the prosecution---Involvement of the accused had become dubious and the same could not be termed as normal and routine looking to the discrepancies occurred in the evidence of prosecution witnesses---Accused only shot the deceased once and did not choose to harm the prosecution witnesses and complainant even when the parties were known to each other and knowing fully well that in the case of criminal prosecution, same witnesses would lead to them being hanged for the murder---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of about fourteen hours in lodging FIR---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Motive behind the occurrence was that few days prior to the occurrence harsh words were exchanged between accused and deceased---In the present case, there was an inordinate delay of almost 14 hours in the lodging of FIR---No explanation whereof was provided for the same and it held great value in the defence case---Explanation furnished for the said delay was that the complainant was aged and waited for his brother's arrival from other city to lodge the FIR---Such stance in itself appeared to be highly illogical as the least the complainant party could have done was inform the police of the incident promptly and lodged the FIR later on, which would have set the procedural instances off, instead they chose to stay mum and let the body rot at the place of incident---Nonetheless, the delay was undisputed and its explanation was lacking---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Motive was not proved---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Motive as set up by the prosecution was confusing---Initially, the motive alleged in the FIR by the complainant was that 3 or 4 days prior to the incident, deceased had a heated argument with the accused which left them annoyed and they issued him threats of further consequences---Allegedly, there existed a dispute between the two parties over matrimonial issues as well---With regard to the initial motive, the complainant deposed in his cross-examination that it was a fact that such exchange of hot words between my brother deceased and accused party had not taken place in my presence---In that regard, a witness also deposed that he did not know if a quarrel was created between both the parties---Motive generally did not hold much value but in cases involving murder especially like the one in hand, it held great importance---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses---Scope---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of complainant by firing---Role assigned to the accused was of mere presence at the place of incident while being armed with a hatchet, which too was not recovered by the police---Investigating Officer also found only two footprints at the place of incident whereas the complainant party had alleged the presence of seven culprits---Role of murder of the deceased had been solely attributed to the other accused who allegedly fired at him with a T.T pistol---No corroborative piece of evidence was available with the prosecution to connect the present accused with the alleged offence---Complainant, in his cross-examination, had deposed that in those days of occurrence of instant offence, the crop of cotton was standing in the lands of some body else and it was picking season of the crop and its height was above the length of [a] man---To contradict the same, other witness in his cross-examination deposed that at that time the crop of cotton was not standing at the length above to the height of person---Cotton crop was standing at the height of trunk of (a) man---Said witness denied that the season of crop was picking season---With regard to the distance between the place of incident and nearby village and link road, the complainant had deposed in his cross-examination that the village was situated at the distance of about 80 paces from the place of incident---Said deposition was contradicted by other witness who deposed that the place of occurrence was situated in the lands at the distance of 10/15 paces from metalled road leading towards village---Both the said depositions were contradicted by another witness, who deposed that the place of vardat was situated at the distance of one mile from our village---Complainant, again in his cross-examination, deposed that the place of occurrence was situated 30/40 paces inside the land from link road leading from village to a town---Witness again deposed in the cross-examination that the place of incident was situated at the distance of half mile from the road where murder of deceased took place---Such contradictions had dented the prosecution case enough to warrant an acquittal---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentences recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State Conviction---Scope---No conviction can be awarded to an accused until and unless reliable, trustworthy and unimpeachable evidence containing no discrepancy casting no cloud over the veracity of prosecution story is adduced by the prosecution. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State Benefit of doubt--- Principle---Prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and it was not for the accused to disprove the case against him who might take any and as many defences as he liked to the allegations against him as the onus rested on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt---If at any point there raised doubts in the prosecution case, the benefit of the same must go to the accused. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SAJID ALI VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If there was a single circumstance which created reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of the accused, then the accused would be entitled to the benefit not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right.

SAJID ALI vs State S — 2023 YLR 1675 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR