Citation Name: 2025 YLR 409 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Kashif Khan vs State S

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 YLR 409 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Kashif Khan VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused persons committed murder of deceased and caused fire arm injuries to the injured witness during course of dacoity, who were employees of a security company---Complainant stated that after 10/15 days of the incident he was called by Investigating Officer at Police Station and there he was shown 03 culprits with muffled faces who were already arrested in some other case and were formally arrested in present case under memo, which was signed by him and the co-mashir---Said witness further stated that the accused and co-accused were identified by him with specific role during course of their identification parade, which was conducted by Judicial Magistrate---As per memo. of arrest, the accused and co-accused were arrested formally in the case on 13.08.2018 by Investigating Officer on their identification by the complainant at the police station---In such situation, the arranging for identification parade through Magistrate on 20.08.2018 with delay of about 07 days was mockery of the procedure---If there was any need for identification parade of the accused and co-accused then it should been conducted through injured witness of the incident which the prosecution had failed to conduct for no obvious reason---Such omission could not be overlooked---Witness on account of his failure to identify the accused and co-accused was declared hostile to the prosecution, thus his evidence could not be lost sight of---Injured witness was not able to identify the culprits involved in the incident except the accused---Identity of the accused by injured witness at trial did not satisfy the requirement of the law---Police official who actually arrested the accused and allegedly recovered a pistol from him used in commission of the incident had been given up by the prosecution---Non-examination of said witness could not be overlooked---No forensic report with available with regard to the recovered pistol from the accused---Investigating Officer stated that the accused and co-accused during course of interrogation admitted their guilt before him---If it was believed to be so even then such admission on their part in terms of Art. 39 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, could not be used as evidence---Moreover, there was no recovery of robbed articles---By not awarding punishment to the accused for committing robbery or causing fire shot injuries to injured witness, he impliedly had been acquitted even by trial Court for such allegation---On the basis of same evidence, co-accused had already been acquitted by the trial Court and their acquittal had not been challenged by the prosecution---Accused had pleaded innocence, and such plea on his part could not be overlooked---In these circumstances, it would be safe to conclude that the prosecution had not been able to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 409 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Kashif Khan vs State S — 2025 YLR 409 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR