MUHAMMAD NAWAZ vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 670 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 NAWAZ VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 393 & 427---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S.23(1)(a)---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, robbery, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, possessing illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Presence of the accused at the spot proved---accused while committing robbery made firing upon guards and police, due to which one guard was injured and SIP died; police also made firing in retaliation, due to which two culprits sustained injuries and later on one died---Significantly during cross-examination of the eye-witness, the accused admitted his presence at the crime scene by suggesting that he was hit by firearm whilst sitting outside the bank for which he was lulling around without explanation as he was not even an account holder at that bank---Furthermore, defence contended that accused did not know his accomplice who was shot as well at the crime scene and later died of his injuries but suggested in cross-examination that the deceased accused had a bank account at the bank---If accused did not know the deceased accused it would not make any sense for him to put that suggestion to the eye-witness as it appeared that he was trying to establish that accomplice was present as a customer of the bank and not there to rob it---In any event the defence version was completely belied by the CCTV in the USB---Thus, the evidence of the eye-witness was found to be reliable, trustworthy and confidence inspiring and there was no issue of mistaken identity as the accused was arrested on the spot in an injured condition in day light hours and he could be convicted on the evidence of that eye-witness alone though it would be of assistance by way of caution if there was some corroborative/supportive evidence---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt, however, due to some extenuating circumstances, death sentence was converted into imprisonment for life---appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentence.

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 670 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR