IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 852 of 2019

Appellant: Qadir through Mr. Abdullah Nizamani advocate

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

Complainant: Sher Zada through Mr. Zahoor-ud-din Mahsood advocate

Date of hearing: 10.10.2022

Date of judgment: 10.10.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is alleged that the appellant with rest of the culprits during course of robbery, committed murder of Bashrullah by causing him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered. On conclusion of trial, co-accused Bilal was acquitted while the appellant was convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.200,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months; the appellant was further convicted under Section 397 PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 04 years (which shall not have been less than 07 years) and to pay fine of Rs.200,000/- and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months; all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently, with benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C by learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge/ MCTC, Malir/Extension/Karachi vide judgment dated 05.07.2019, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant jail appeal.

2. At the very outset, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that the material evidence with the prosecution against the appellant was that of Mr. Nadir Khan Burdi, the Magistrate having jurisdiction, who conducted the identification parade he has been given up by the prosecution only for the reason that he has resigned from judicial service, which itself was not a cogent reason for his non-examination, by such omission the appellant has been prejudiced in his defence seriously. By pointing out so, he suggested for remand of the case for examination of Mr. Nadir Khan Burdi, the Magistrate for fair disposal of the case, which is not opposed by learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

3. In view of above, the impugned judgment only to the extent of appellant is set aside with direction to learned trial Court to call and examine Mr. Nadir Khan Burdi, the Magistrate and any other witness, which prosecution may intend to examine and then to proceed with the case further and make its disposal in accordance with law within 03 months after receipt of copy of this judgment.

4. Instant jail appeal is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE