PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD IRFAN vs State Ss — 2023 YLRN 17 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2023 YLRN 17 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2023
Parties
MUHAMMAD IRFAN vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 7---Q; S. 23

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD IRFAN VS State Ss. 302(b), 365-a, 377 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, Kidnapping or abduction for extorting property, valuable security, etc., unnatural offence, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Call Data Record---Scope---accused were charged for abducting the minor son of complainant for ransom but subsequently he was murdered---In the present case, Call Data Record report for two cell numbers, one of an individual, did not indicate any contact made from the said number with the complainant---Next mobile number which number was the prime one used for the demand of ransom---Besides the deposition of Police Inspector, nothing was brought on record to establish that any of these numbers were in the use of the present accused who then used the same for the demand of ransom---Said witness, in his cross-examination, deposed that he had not recorded the statement nor cited him as a witness nor did he involve the person, in whose name the SIM through which ransom was demanded was made---In the memo. of initial arrest and recovery of the accused persons in the case under S.23(i)(a) of Sindh arms act, 2013, it was mentioned that from accused, an old G5 mobile phone and a Ufone SIM card was recovered, from other accused a Nokia phone with two SIM cards was recovered and from another accused, a Nokia mobile phone with six SIM cards were seized---However, the memo. never mentioned the numbers connected to each of those nine SIM cards recovered in total, which was the failure of the arresting Officer and a blow to the prosecution case that could otherwise have proven to be significant in implicating the accused persons---Had the numbers been mentioned in the memo, it would have been easier to establish that those were recovered from the accused persons which would have made the CDR relevant, however without the same, CDR report held no evidential value against the accused persons and established nothing besides the fact that the ransom was demanded from the number belonging to one of than, an individual not even involved in the case---Said Police Inspector further deposed in his cross-examination that during investigation he had not recovered any mobile and SIM number in the name of accused---In the CDR there was no mobile SIM or IMEI number in the name of accused---Prosecution also failed to produce a transcript or an audio recording of the relevant ransom calls---Recovered memory card was of no assistance to the prosecution as it did not in any way link any of the accused persons to the crime---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English