Yousuf Khan vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 334 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.

Yousuf Khan VS State Ss. 324, 353, 186 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, use of criminal force or assault on public servant while he is performing his duty, obstructing a public servant in the performance of their duties, common intention, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Recovery of weapon of offence---Reliance---Scope---accused was charged that he made firing upon the police party; in retaliation police also made firing due to which appellant sustained firearm injury and was apprehended at the spot---Record showed that 30 bore pistol allegedly recovered from the appellant was, in fact, the very weapon used in the commission of the offence---On that premise, the Trial Court upheld the applicability of S.353, P.P.C and 23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013---Insofar as S.324, P.P.C was concerned, it was observed that the offence was constituted not merely by the resultant injury, but by the existence of the requisite mens rea to commit qatl-i-amd coupled with an overt act in furtherance thereof---Prosecution case was that the appellant, upon being signaled to stop, opened direct fire upon the police party and, during the ensuing exchange, sustained a firearm injury on his right leg, while crime empties were secured from the spot---Prosecution witnesses had remained consistent on the essential features of the occurrence, namely, the alleged firing by the appellant, the encounter, his injury, apprehension at the spot and the recovery of the unlicensed weapon from his possession---Certain discrepancies were highlighted by the defence with respect to peripheral details---However, upon independent scrutiny of the record, such inconsistencies could be treated as minor in nature, not going to the root of the case, and insufficient to dislodge the prosecution version regarding the occurrence, arrest and alleged recovery---Such discrepancies did not materially impair the evidentiary substratum of the prosecution case---Thus, convictions under S.353 P.P.C and S.23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013 were maintained---appeal was disposed of, accordingly. Citation Name: 2026 MLD 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Yousuf Khan VS State Ss. 324, 353, 186 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, use of criminal force or assault on public servant while he is performing his duty, obstructing a public servant in the performance of their duties, common intention, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Offence under S.186, P.P.C---applicability---accused was charged that he made firing upon the police party; in retaliation police also made firing due to which appellant sustained firearm injury and was apprehended at the spot---Section 186, P.P.C, was attracted only when an accused was shown to have voluntarily obstructed a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, and such obstruction must be established through clear, specific and affirmative evidence independent of the mere use of force or resistance contemplated under other penal provisions---In the present case, the prosecution version, even if taken at its face value, was that the appellant allegedly fired upon the police party upon being signaled to stop and was apprehended after sustaining injury---There was no distinct or independent evidence on record to demonstrate any separate act of "obstruction" as envisaged under S.186, P.P.C, separate from the alleged act of firing itself---Moreover, none of the prosecution witnesses had attributed any specific overt act to the appellant constituting obstruction of public duty in the statutory sense contemplated by S.186, P.P.C---Where the alleged obstructive conduct is inseparably merged with the use of criminal force against a public servant, the invocation of S.186, P.P.C becomes legally redundant and impermissible---In absence of proof of a separate and independent ingredient of obstruction, the conviction of the appellant under S.186, P.P.C could not be legally sustained and was, therefore, liable to be set aside---However, convictions under S.353, P.P.C and S.23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013, were maintained---appeal was disposed of, accordingly. Citation Name: 2026 MLD 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Yousuf Khan VS State Ss. 324, 353, 186 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, use of criminal force or assault on public servant while he is performing his duty, obstructing a public servant in the performance of their duties, common intention, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---act of terrorism, applicability of---Scope---accused was charged that he made firing upon the police party; in retaliation police also made firing due to which appellant sustained firearm injury and was apprehended at the spot---Mere commission of a violent or firearm-related offence, by itself, did not ipso facto bring it within the ambit of "terrorism" unless the prosecution affirmatively established that such act was committed with the specific object of striking terror, creating fear or insecurity in the public at large or in any section of the society, or to achieve any of the purposes enumerated in S.6(1) of the act, 1997---In order to constitute terrorism, the act must not only fall within the mischief of subsection (2) of S.6 but must also be intrinsically connected with the objectives mentioned in subsection (1) thereof---Even heinous or violent acts springing from personal disputes, situational encounters or isolated events, lacking the requisite design to terrorize society, would fall outside the purview of the anti-Terrorism act---When the facts of the present case were examined, it was evident that the prosecution had failed to bring on record any material whatsoever to show that the alleged act of the appellant was actuated by any intent or design to spread terror amongst the public---at the highest, the prosecution case disclosed an alleged encounter occurring during routine patrolling, in which, according to the prosecution itself, only the appellant sustained a firearm injury, while no member of the police party received even a scratch and no independent member of the public was affected---There was neither any allegation nor any evidence suggesting that the alleged firing created panic, fear or insecurity in the locality or among the general public---Occurrence, as projected by the prosecution, at best emanated from a situational confrontation between the police and the appellant, lacking the essential mens rea required to attract the extraordinary jurisdiction of the anti-Terrorism act---Offences arising out of personal or situational encounters with the police do not fall within the fold of terrorism in the absence of the requisite terrorising intent---Consequently, the conviction of the appellant under S.7 of the anti-Terrorism act, 1997 was legally unsustainable and was set aside---However, convictions under S.353, P.P.C and S.23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013 were maintained---appeal was disposed of, accordingly. Citation Name: 2026 MLD 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Yousuf Khan VS State Ss. 324, 353, 186 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, use of criminal force or assault on public servant while he is performing his duty, obstructing a public servant in the performance of their duties, common intention, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Sentence, reduction in---accused was charged that he made firing upon the police party; in retaliation police also made firing due to which appellant sustained firearm injury and was apprehended at the spot---In the present case, the prosecution had failed to satisfy the essential jurisdictional prerequisites for the applicability of S.7 of the anti-Terrorism act, 1997; consequently, the conviction recorded against the appellant thereunder could not be legally sustained---Similarly, the convictions of the appellant under S.324, P.P.C was also not tenable---However, the prosecution had been able to establish the guilt of appellant beyond reasonable doubt for the offences punishable under S.353, P.P.C and S.23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013---Resultantly, the convictions of the appellant under S.7 of the anti-Terrorism act, 1997 and S.324, P.P.C as recorded through the impugned judgment, were set aside, while his convictions under S.353, P.P.C and S.23(1)(a) of the Sindh arms act, 2013 were maintained---Nevertheless, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the occurrence, and the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant, the sentences awarded to him in respect of the said surviving offences were modified and reduced to the period he already undergone---appeal was disposed of, accordingly.

Yousuf Khan vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD