Citation Name: 2025 YLR 735 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Riaz 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 YLR 735 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Riaz VS State Ss. 302(b), 393 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 22---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Identification parade---No description of accused given by eye-witness before identification parade---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused tried to snatch mobile phone from the deceased/grand maternal son of complainant and on his resistance, they opened straight fires upon the deceased, due to which he died---Eye-witness, who was related to the deceased, was a shop keeper whose shop was allegedly robbed by the appellant and his accomplices---According to his evidence on 14.03.2018 at about 5pm he was present in a shop when three person's duly armed came on motor cycle and robbed him of cash---As the robbers were leaving the shop the deceased, who was from the neighborhood, was robbed by the appellant and his two accomplices---Deceased however put up resistance which led to one of the three robbers shooting him---Said witness was related to the deceased however he had no proven enmity with the appellant and as such his evidence could be taken at its own face value---Police recorded his eye-witness S.161 Cr.P.C statement within two days of the incident and he picked out the appellant from identification parade 13 days later---Eye-witness did not know the accused before the incident and thus it was necessary for the identification parade to be held and it was also necessary that at the time of giving his S.161 Cr.P.C statement he should have given a hulia/description of the appellant which he failed to do which rendered his correct identification of the appellant at the identification parade doubtful---As per evidence of other eye-witness on 14.03.2018 at about 5.15pm he was on his way home on motor bike and when he reached a Masjid he heard firing, but continued his journey and saw three persons on a motor cycle who were fleeing away---Shop keepers informed him that dacoits had shot the deceased---On 27.03.2018 he attended an identification parade where he picked out the appellant as the person who was driving the motor cycle---Said witness was not related to the deceased and as such he was an independent witness who had no reason to falsely implicate the appellant in the case---Said eye-witness, however, did not give any description/hulia of the appellant at the time of giving his S.161 Cr.P.C statement---Said witness appeared to be a chance witness and he did not witness the murder and only seen three persons on a motor cycle fleeing away---During his cross examination said witness stated that he was on his feet which contradicted his evidence that he was on a motor bike; he could not make out the make, model or even color of the motor bike as it passed him at speed; he could not even remember the color of the clothes of the persons who were riding the motor cycle; he had seen no one firing at the deceased and as such was not an eye-witness to the murder---Based on the said evidence, it was found impossible that he could have identified correctly the appellant at the identification parade when he had not given any hulia/ description of accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 735 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Riaz vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 735 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR