MUHAMMAD SADIQUE vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 560 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.

MUHAMMAD SADIQUE VS State Ss. 324, 353, 399, 402, 148 & 149---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 24---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, making preparation for dacoity, assembling for purpose of committing dacoity, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, possessing unlicensed weapon---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Night time occurrence---Identification by lights of police van doubtful---accused were charged for stopping the police mobile for robbing purpose and made straight firing on police party with intention to commit their qatl-i-amd---Police party also fired upon the culprits in their defence and one accused was apprehended in injured condition---according to prosecution case, the police party recognized the culprits in the light of police mobile, whereas the place of incident was situated in a jungle and the time of incident was also dark hours of the night and admittedly the distance between the police party and the culprits was about 700/800 feet---Complainant in his evidence deposed that during the course of patrolling, at 11.30 p.m., they reached an area, situated at link road, and in the light of police mobile, they saw two culprits both armed with pistols, and three accused armed with Kalashnikovs---However, that was nearly impossible and seemed to be unbelievable that the police party would recognize the culprits in the light of police van when they were standing at a distance of about 700/800 feet in the darkness of the night and more particularly the place of incident was a jungle where admittedly all types of trees were available---Moreover, it was also unique on the part of the complainant that he identified each of the culprits by name and with the fire-arm they allegedly were holding at the time of incident---Said fact cast serious doubt in the prosecution story, as stated by the complainant---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD SADIQUE vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 560 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ