HUBDAR alias HUBOO JAGRANI vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 599 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.

HUBDAR alias HUBOO JAGRANI VS State Ss. 324, 353, 186, 224, 225, 427, 337-F(i), 337-H(2), 147, 148 & 149---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S.7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions, resistance or obstruction by a person to his lawful apprehension, resistance or obstruction to lawful apprehension of another person, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, rash or negligent act to endanger human life or personal safety of others, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-association of private witnesses--- Consequential---accused were charged for making murderous assault on the police party with firing while their companion was arrested, due to which one Police Constable sustained injuries---Record showed that no private person of the locality was associated as mashir and in all the mashirnamas the witnesses were Police Officials---Investigating Officer of the case deposed that there were hundreds of houses, however, he did not take pain to associate any of the inmates of the said houses as mashir in the case---In his cross-examination, Investigating Officer categorically admitted that he did not take any private person as witness of place of incident and did not knock the door of houses---Likewise mashir/Head Constable also admitted in his cross-examination that no private person was associated as mashir by Investigating Officer---Notable that while effecting imaginary arrest of a accused at Police Station, B-Section the Investigating Officer associated as mashir of arrest the two Police Officials, who had accompanied him from Police Station---Very strangely the Investigating Officer did not make any official of Police Station, B-Section, as mashir of arrest of accused---From such admissions, it was apparent that the prosecution had not made any efforts to procure any private person of the locality to act as mashir/witness---Thus, the mandatory requirement as envisaged under S. 103, Cr.P.C., was not fulfilled---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

HUBDAR alias HUBOO JAGRANI vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 599 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR