IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 392 of 2020

Appellant: Ibrahim through Ms. Sara Malkani advocate

Respondent: The State through Mr. Faheem Hussain,

Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of hearing: 13.12.2022

Date of Judgment: 13.12.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the appellant not only committed murder of Soomar by causing him fire shot injuries but also caused fire shot injuries to P.W Bachayo with intention commit his murder, for that he was booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, he was convicted u/s 302(b) PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life as tazir and to pay compensation of Rs.100,000/- to each of the legal heirs of the deceased and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months; he was further convicted u/s 337-D PPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 05 years as tazir and to pay 1/3^rd of the Diyat to P.W Bachayo; both the sentences were directed to run concurrently with benefit of Section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned Sessions Judge Thatta, vide judgment dated 14.04.2015, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant appeal from jail.

2. At the very outset, it is pointed out by learned DPG for the State that the appellant was specifically charged for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 337-D, 337-F(i) and 504 PPC. In the impugned judgment, no point for determination is framed to have an answer for allegation against the appellant for having committed offence punishable under Sections 324, 337-F(i) and 504 PPC, which was essential. By pointing out so, he suggested for remand of the case to learned trial Court for re-writing of the judgment in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the appellant was not able to controvert the contention so advanced by learned DPG for the State.

4. Heard arguments and perused the record.

5. The omission which is pointed out by learned DPG for the state takes support from the record, which has rendered the impugned judgment to be illegal in terms of section 367 Cr.P.C, which calls for framing of point of determination on each and every allegation made against the accused, consequently, it is set aside with direction to learned trial court to re-write the same independently, without being influenced from earlier findings after calling and examining P.W Allah Bachayo, if he is found capable to record his evidence.

6. The instant Jail appeal is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE