IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No. 427 of 2018

Appellant: Nemo for appellant Syed Azam Raza Naqvi

N

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

Date of hearing: 07.10.2022

Date of judgment: 07.10.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J-It is alleged that on arrest from the appellant was secured unlicensed pistol of 30 bore with magazine containing one live bullet of same bore by police party of PS Malir City led by SIP Sagheer Ahmed, which he allegedly used for committing murder of his wife Mst. Tabbasum Zehra, for that he was booked and reported upon. After due trial, the appellant was convicted under section 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 and sentenced to undergo R.I for 03 years with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 03 months with benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C by learned IV-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South vide judgment dated 16.07.2018 which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant Criminal Appeal.

2. As per jail roll furnished by the Jail Authorities, the appellant has already been released from jail on completion of his jail term and probably this appears to be a reason with him to have neglected the instant Criminal Appeal, same could not be kept pending by this Court on its file for want of appearance of the appellant, therefore, it was decided to be disposed of on merits after providing chance of hearing to learned D.P.G for the State, who has supported the impugned judgment.

3. Complainant SIP Sagheer Ahmed, who has secured from the appellant unlicensed pistol which he allegedly used for committing murder of his wife has not been examined by the prosecution for the reason that he has retired from police service. The retirement itself may not be a reason for non-examination of the official who is the complainant of the case. In that way the appellant has been prejudiced in his defence seriously. P.W/mashir Syed Shahid Raza was fair enough to say that the pistol was secured by the police it was found lying under the head of the deceased. If it was so, then it prima facie suggests that the alleged pistol was not secured from the appellant personally. Evidence of P.W/mashir Muhammad Arif is only to the extent that memo of arrest and recovery bears his signature. I.O/Inspector Iftikhar Hyder Shah could not be examined by the prosecution on account of his death. In these circumstances, it would be hard to conclude that the prosecution has been able prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt.

4. In view of above, the impugned judgment is set aside, consequently, the appellant is acquitted of the offence for which he was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court. No formal order for release of the appellant is being passed as he has already been released in present case, by Jail authorities, on completion of his jail term.

5. The instant Criminal Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE