SADORO MIRBAHAR vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 632 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.

SADORO MIRBAHAR VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 337-F(iii), 337-H(2) & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mutalahimah, rash or negligent act endanger to human life or the personal safety of other, common intention, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Ocular account supported by medical evidence---Prosecution case was that an encounter took place between police and accused persons after the accused persons were escaping after committing the murder of father of complainant due to refusal of payment of extortion money, whereas a Police Constable also died and a Head Constable along with a passerby sustained firearm injury---Ocular account had been furnished by complainant and two injured witnesses---Perusal of the depositions of two injured eye-witnesses when put in juxtaposition with the FIR and the version of the complainant suggested that both the eye-witnesses had fully implicated the accused while assigning him role of causing a firearm injuries to the deceased along with other assailants---Even complainant and the two eye-witnesses of the main incident of murder and demand of extortion had fully implicated the accused while assigning him the specific role of firing at the deceased---Medical Officer conducted postmortem of deceased and found similar injury on him being a lacerated punctured wound on left upper chest over the heart and the exit wound at the back---all of prosecution witnesses unequivocally stated that they were present at the place of incident and then were shot at by the assailants---all the said witnesses had fully supported the prosecution case to the effect of involvement of the present accused---During cross-examination, defence was unable to point out any major discrepancies that might be fatal to the prosecution case---all the assailants were armed---Nature and locale of injury was also supported by Medical Officer who conducted postmortem of both the deceased, finding twelve injuries with a wound of entry and exit on the person of the deceased Police Constable and two on deceased son of complainant and those were caused by the firearm of the accused---Motive behind the murder of deceased was demand of Bhatta (extortion money)---Said aspect of the case had not been denied either, nor had such assertion been placed before the prosecution witnesses at the time of cross-examination---Circumstances established that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

SADORO MIRBAHAR vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 632 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ