Muhammad Kashif vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 2433 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 Kashif VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the daughter of complainant by inflicting churri blows---Admittedly, there was no ocular evidence available on the record to connect the accused with the commission of offence as the incident was unseen and FIR was lodged on the statement/dying declaration of the deceased when she was found in injured condition by her father---Complainant had disclosed in the FIR that on 19.08.2014 he was present in his house along with his brother-in-lawand received a call from someone, who informed him that his daughter was injured---After receiving such information, he along with his brother-in-law reached at the house of in-laws of his daughter and found his daughter seriously injured and blood oozing from her injuries---Deceased informed complainant that at the instigation of her mother-in-law, her brother-in-law caused knife/churri blows to her---Complainant further disclosed in his evidence as well as in the FIR that he along with his brother-in-law went outside the house to take the vehicle and in the meanwhile the husband of the injured/deceased had taken injured to local Hospital and then to Civil Hospital where she succumbed to the injuries---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. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of weapon of offence---Inconsequential---Accused were charged for committing murder of the daughter of complainant by inflicting churri, blows---Record showed that a weapon of offence, churri was recovered from the accused---Recovery witness stated that the crime weapon had not been recovered from the accused in his presence---Said witness had produced a memo. of recovery and said that it only bore his signature---Said witness admitted that the case property viz. knife present in the Court and seen by him at the police station had not been recovered from his house---Prosecution declared the witness as hostile and with permission of the Court cross-examined him where he had denied the suggestion that a crime weapon was recovered by police in his presence from their house---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. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Confession, retraction of---Scope---Accused were charged for committing murder of the daughter of complainant by inflicting churri blows---Accused was arrested on 21.08.2014 and his confessional statement was recorded on 27.08.2014 with a delay of about six (6) days---Except the confessional statement made by accused there was no other evidence available on record---Later on the accused retracted his confessional statement while recording his S.342 Cr.P.C. statement---Confession alone cannot form the basis of a conviction unless it finds strong corroboration from independent and reliable evidence in material particulars---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. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 164---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Confession, recording of---Infirmities---Accused were charged for committing murder of the daughter of complainant by inflicting churri blows---Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the confessional statement of the accused admitted in cross-examination that the accused was remanded to judicial custody through the same Investigating Officer after recording his confessional statement---In the confessional statement, all the questions were written in English and the reply so made by the accused was also written in English, but in the last question the accused had replied in Urdu---In the footnote/memo. randum it was not written that the questions so made to accused were translated into Urdu or in the language which he understood---Furthermore, the evidence given by the Judicial Magistrate nowhere stated that any access to an advocate or any relative was given to the accused---In the present case, the entire family was booked by the police while arresting accused, his brother, their mother and other family members, as such, it could not be said that the confessional statement was voluntary---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. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State S. 164---Confession, retraction of---Scope---Retracted confessional statement should not be acted upon and made the basis of conviction unless it is corroborated in material particulars---Confessional statement has to be received holistically without quantification---Once confession is found unreliable, it cannot furnish the basis for the conviction of accused. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates reasonable doubt in a prudent mind, then its benefit will be extended in favour of the accused not as a matter of grace or concession, but as a matter of right. Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Muhammad Kashif VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Motive not proved---Accused were charged for committing murder of the daughter of complainant by inflicting churri blows---Motive set up by the prosecution was a matrimonial quarrel but no material had been brought on the record to believe the same---Complainant in his cross-examination admitted that he had not stated in his examination in chief that his daughter had made complaints against her mother-in-law and her brother-in-law prior to the incident---From the evidence of the complainant, it appeared that after receiving the injuries she/deceased for nearly 40/45 minutes remained alive and thereafter she succumbed to her injuries but as per evidence of Medical Officer, duration between death and injuries was instantaneous---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.

Muhammad Kashif vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 2433 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR