Ali Hassan Magsi alias Akbar vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 918 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.

Ali Hassan Magsi alias Akbar VS State Ss. 302(b), 392, 397 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---Qatl-i-amd, common intention, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Sole eye-witness; evidence of---Reliance---accused were charged for committing murder of two friends of the complainant by firing during robbery---Record showed that the prosecution's case rested on the sole eye-witness/complainant to the robbery and murder of the deceased and in particular his correct identification of the accused as the persons who robbed and murdered the deceased---Eye-witness lived close to the deceased and was a friend of the deceased and was not a chance witness as was corroborated by other two witnesses---Said eye-witness had seen the accused from close range at the time he and the deceased were robbed by the accused which would have taken a few minutes---Said witness had seen the accused when they opened fire on their car murdering the deceased which firing went on for a couple of minutes---all of this took place from close range---at least two witnesses had deposed that there were street lights at the time---Car lights would also have been on as well as light surrounding the aTM and those in their shops who locked up after the incident out of fear---Faces of accused persons were uncovered and thus the eye-witness would have been able to get a good clear unobstructed view of them over a reasonable period of time---Complainant recorded his FIR within 48 hours of the incident where he gave a brief hullia of the accused persons and stated that he could recognize them by face if he saw them again---Said witness had no enmity with the accused persons and thus had no reason to implicate them in a false case and hence he did not name them in his FIR---Other two witnesses were also named in the FIR as following the car as they were also going to have tea with them and arrived at the scene and helped in taking the deceased to hospital---Record showed that there was no material improvements in the evidence of complainant from his earlier FIR---Complainant gave his evidence in a natural and straightforward manner and was not dented despite a lengthy cross-examination---Complainant was not related to the deceased being only a friend---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt except the offences under anti-Terrorism act, 1997 thus the sentences under anti-Terrorism act were set-aside---appeal against conviction was dismissed with modification in sentence.

Ali Hassan Magsi alias Akbar vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 918 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ