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

MUHAMMAD SHAKEEL alias CHOTOO vs State Ss — 2024 MLD 286 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 MLD 286 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
MLD
Parties
MUHAMMAD SHAKEEL alias CHOTOO vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 7---Q; S. 161

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 SHAKEEL alias CHOTOO VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 109 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Statement of sole eye-witness---Scope---accused was charged that he along with his co-accused made firing upon the complainant party, due to which three persons died and two were injured---admittedly, it was a day light incident however the eye-witness did not know the accused and that was the first time he had seen him---Eye-witness would only have got a fleeting glance of the accused under traumatic and chaotic circumstances and even in his own evidence, he stated that he was terrified and ran to save his life and became confused---Surprisingly, despite the fact that the eye-witness's friends were murdered before his very eyes, he being an important eye-witness had not gone to the police to give his statement, instead the police came looking for him which raised eye brows---Eye-witness gave his S. 161, Cr.P.C. statement five days after the incident which went against him---according to the evidence of eye-witness due to trauma he was unable to prepare sketches of any of the accused who made the firing and he did not give any description in respect of any of the persons who had made firing but only said that he could recognize them again if he saw them---Identification parade was held after three years and six months of the incident when the accused was arrested in another case and the eye-witness stated at the identification parade that 7/8 people made the firing as opposed to 4/5---Thus, it was found that the eye-witness had not 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 shadow of any doubt---appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD

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