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

SHAFQUAT HUSSAIN vs State Ss — 2024 MLD 327 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 MLD 327 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
MLD
Parties
SHAFQUAT HUSSAIN vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal

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

SHAFQUAT HUSSAIN VS State Ss. 302, 324, 147, 148, 149 & 114---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common object, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly and abettor present when offence committed---Appreciation of evidence---Record showed that complainant, in the FIR, had stated that on instigation of a co-accused, appellant/accused and another co-accused (already acquitted) had made straight fires upon them from their respective Kalashnikovs and one bullet fired by appellant had hit his brother (deceased) on his chest, whereas in his evidence he had not taken name of said co-accused (who instigated) for making firing upon deceased and had stated that it was appellant who made a direct fire from his Kalashnikov upon deceased with intention to commit his murder---Further, in the FIR the complainant had stated that as soon as they reached the spot they saw the accused standing duly armed with weapons, while in his evidence, he had stated that accused had come to spot riding on two motorcycles; his assertion had been contradicted by another prosecution witness (an eye-witness), who had stated that the accused came in front of them by foot---Said prosecution witness had stated that on instigation of co-accused all accused started firing on them and then appellant also started doing so and his fire hit the deceased on his chest which was different to what complainant had said, in his cross-examination---Complainant stated that accused were standing at a distance of 15 meters (almost 45 feet) from them and conjointly fired at complainant party, members of which, from narration in FIR, appeared to be standing together in close proximity, but strangely, it was only the deceased who received a single bullet injury, and none of the prosecution witnesses sustained a scratch from alleged heavy firing made by accused---Prosecution, because of existence of doubt, had not succeeded in proving the case against the appellant---Appeal filed by the accused was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD

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