IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

 

Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2022

 

                           

Appellants:                   Mehtab Ahmed Khan Niazi @ Maya through Mr. Dilawar Hussain advocate

 

The State:                      Through Mr. Faheem Hussain Panhwar, Prosecutor General Sindh

 

Date of hearing:           15.11.2022

 

Date of judgment:        15.11.2022

 

 

J U D G M E N T

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is alleged that the appellant with rest of the culprits robbed complainant Muhammad Kamran of Rupees Two Crores, for that he was booked and reported upon by the police. On conclusion of trial, he and co-accused Farhan Khan, Ali Shan and Khalid Mehmood were convicted under section 395 PPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 08 years and to pay fine of Rs.100,000/- each and in default whereof to simple imprisonment for 01 year with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned X-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South vide judgment dated 18.02.2022, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant appeal.

2.       It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant being innocent has been involved in this case by the police on the basis of statement of co-accused otherwise he has nothing to do with the alleged incident and he has been convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court virtually on the basis of no evidence, therefore, he is entitled to his acquittal which is opposed by learned DPG for the state by contending that it is case of conjoint liability which the prosecution has been able to prove against him beyond shadow of doubt.

3.       Heard arguments and perused the record.

4.       The name and description of the appellant are not disclosed by the complainant in his FIR, though it is lodged with unexplained delay of about 02 days; no identification parade of the appellant has taken place; there is no recovery of any sort from the appellant; he obviously has been involved in commission of incident by the police on the basis of statements of co-accused Farhan Khan, Khalid Mehmood and Ali Shan which could hardly be treated as evidence. Even otherwise, I.O/SIP Muhammad Siddique on asking was fair enough to admit that he has not recovered anything implicating the appellant in commission of incident. In these circumstances, it would be safe to conclude that the prosecution has not been able to prove the involvement of appellant in commission of incident.

5.       In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant (Mehtab) by way of impugned judgment are set aside, consequently, he is acquitted of the offence with which he was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court; he is in custody to be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other custody case.

6.       The instant appeal is disposed of accordingly.

                  

 JUDGE