IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2022

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 265 of 2022

Appellants: Waqar Younus and Hidayatullah @ Inayatullah through M/s Sajjad Gul Khatri and Muhammad Sakhi Ghazali advocates

Respondent: The State through Mr. Faheem Hussain,

Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of hearing: 20.12.2022

Date of Judgment: 20.12.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the appellants during course of robbery committed murder of Muhammad Waseem by causing him fire shot injuries, they were apprehended at the spot and from them were secured the robbed money and pistol which they used in commission of incident, for that they were booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, they were convicted under Section 392 r/w section 397/34 PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months; appellant Waqar Younus was further convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life as Tazir and to pay compensation of Rs.500,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months; the sentences awarded to appellant Waqar Younus were directed to run concurrently, benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C was awarded to both the appellants by learned I-Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Karachi South vide judgment dated 17.03.2022, which is impugned by them by preferring two separate appeals one from jail and other through counsel.

2. At the very outset, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants that on 16.03.2022 the arguments to some extent were heard and then the case was adjourned to 17.03.2022 for further arguments, those actually were not heard and impugned judgment was announced by learned trial Court in abrupt manner. In that way, the appellants were prejudiced in their defence seriously which is contrary to the mandate contained by Article 10-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, which prescribes right of fair trial to everyone. By pointing out so, they sought for remand of the case with direction to learned trial Court to re-write the judgment after providing fair chance of hearing to the appellants, which is not opposed by the learned DPG for the State by contending that the point of vicarious liability leading to the death of the deceased on the part of appellants event otherwise is not considered by the learned trial Court in impugned judgment.

3. Heard arguments and perused record.

4. The omissions pointed out above, take support from record, consequently, the impugned judgment is set aside with direction to the learned trial court to re-write the same without being influenced from earlier findings, after providing fair chance of hearing to all the concerned.

5. When this judgment was being parted, it was pointed by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants may also be provided a chance to make further cross examination to the PWs on some material points, which is opposed by learned DPG for the State. However, such request, if any to be made by the appellants before learned trial Court, for its sympathetic consideration, in accordance with law.

6. The instant appeals are disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE