RAHEEL vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 121 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.

RAHEEL VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 186 & 34---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 22---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault and criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions, common intention, possession of unlicensed arms, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Test identification parade---Scope---accused being suspected persons were signalled to stop by the police, but they made firing upon the police with the intention to commit their murder, due to which a Police Constable died while an aSI sustained injuries on his body---Record showed that prior to the incident the sole eye-witness/injured did not know the accused---Said witness only got a fleeting glance at the accused from at least 5 meters away in poor light under the stressful circumstances of being under attack therefore identification parade was necessary which was carried out in accordance with law---Complainant, injured by the firing, gave his FIR with promptitude on the same day of the incident, however it did not provide any meaningful hulia/description of any of the persons who made fire at him and the deceased, except to describe them all as wearing Shalwar Qameez, being of young age and looking Baloch from their faces along with the catch all phrase that he could identify them again---Identification parade was held three months after the incident and as such the incident would not have been fresh in the eye-witnesses mind---Identification parade was conducted five days after the arrest of the accused during which period he was detained in police custody and could have been shown to the eye-witness during that period as claimed by the accused---accused was the only one of the dummies at the identification parade with a bandaged leg and clutches and thus that was a clear pointer to the identifier whom, he was meant to pick out at the identification parade---No details were taken of any of the dummies---Identification of the accused by a sole eye-witness could not be safely relied upon, the case of the prosecution against the accused collapsed---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt--- appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

RAHEEL vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 121 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ