Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Johan Masih vs State Ss

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

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Johan Masih VS State Ss. 397 & 34---Robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Ocular account proved---Accused was charged for robbing the complainant at gun point and was apprehended at the spot---Ocular account of the incident had been furnished by complainant, his fiancé and a Patrolling Officer---Complainant was an independent eye-witness and he had no relationship with the accused and had no ill will or enmity with him so as to involve him in a false case---Promptly lodged S. 154 Cr.P.C statement was not materially improved upon during the course of evidence of complainant---Complainant was not damaged during a lengthy cross-examination---Items which were robbed from complainant were recovered when he was arrested on the spot together with an unlicensed pistol hence the question of misidentification did not arise---Fiancé of complainant who was with the complainant at the time of robbery corroborated the complainant in all material respects---Said witness was an independent witness who had no reason to falsely implicate the accused in the crime---Statement of said witness under S.161, Cr.P.C was made within a day of the incident and her evidence was not materially improved from the same which was found to be trust worthy, reliable and confidence inspiring and hence Court believed her evidence and placed reliance on it---Patrolling Officer was informed of the incident and then he was able to grab hold of the accused while he was trying to make his escape good on foot whilst the other two persons made their escape good---Pistol used in the robbery was recovered from the accused when he was arrested on the spot along with the robbed items---All the witnesses were consistent in their evidence and even if there were some contradictions in their evidence, they were minor in nature and not material and certainly not of such materiality so as to effect the prosecution case and the conviction of the appellant---Evidence of the witnesses provided a believable corroborated unbroken chain of events from the complainant and his fiancé going out on a motor bike to the beach to them being intercepted by three others on a motor bike and robbed at gun point to the police arresting the accused on the spot with the unlicensed pistol and items which had just been robbed form the accused---It was true that there was no independent mashir however it had now become a judicially recognized fact that in such like cases independent members of the public did not want to involve themselves---As such the fact that there were no independent mashirs in the present case was not of huge significance especially when the eye-witness evidence was believed and the eye-witnesses were independent witnesses---Circumstances established that prosecution had proved its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was dismissed accordingly.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Johan Masih vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ