PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

NIAZ AHMED MIRANI vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 726 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 YLR 726 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
YLR
Parties
NIAZ AHMED MIRANI vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 103---; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

NIAZ AHMED MIRANI VS State Ss. 365, 395, 452, 353, 220, 506-2, 504, 337-H(2), 337-a(i), 427, 342 & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---abduction for ransom, dacoity, house trespass, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, commitment for trial or confinement by person having authority who knows that he is acting contrary to law, criminal intimidation, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, hurt by rash or negligent act, shajjah-i-khafifah, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, wrongful confinement, common intention---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of more than five months in sending the crime weapon for analysis--- Consequential--- accused was charged for maltreating with the servant of complainant, forcibly taking away the detenu, abusing the complainant, extending threats of dire consequences and also firing just to spread fear, terror and insecurity in general public, when the complainant went to police station for releasing the detenu---Record showed that there was a long delay of more than five months in sending the crime weapon for forensics allegedly recovered from the accused which put severe dent in the prosecution case and made the recovery itself redundant---From perusal of recovery it seemed that the Kalashnikov allegedly used by the accused in making firing was recovered on 27.4.2012 whereas, as per Ballistic Expert's Report, the same was received in their office on 19.10.2012 i.e. after a delay of five months and 22 days---No explanation had come forward from the side of the prosecution for such an inordinate delay---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt---appeals against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English