IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 02 of 2021
Appellant: Nemo
for Sher Ali
The State: Through
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
Date of hearing: 19.10.2022
Date of judgment: 19.10.2022
J U D G M E N T
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is the case of the prosecution that the
appellant and co-accused Sher Dil robbed complainant Muhammad Naeem Akhtar of
his cash worth Rs.5070/-and then made their escape good from the place of
incident; they were chased and apprehended by police party of P.S Steel Town,
led by ASI Muhammad Moosa after an encounter, thereby co-accused Sher Dil died
after sustaining fire shot injuries; from them were secured the crime weapons,
for that the present case was registered. On conclusion of the trial, the
appellant was convicted under Section 397 PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 07 years, he was further convicted under section 324 PPC and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 05 years with fine of Rs.5000/-
and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 03 months; he was
further convicted under Section 353 PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 01 year; all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently
with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Malir, Karachi vide judgment dated 01.11.2016, which is impugned by the
appellant before this Court by preferring the instant jail appeal.
2. As per jail roll, the appellant has
already been released in present on completion of his jail term and perhaps
this appears to be reason with the appellant to have neglected the instant
appeal, therefore, it is being disposed of after providing chance of hearing to
learned Addl. P.G for the state, who has supported the impugned judgment.
3. Heard arguments and perused the record.
4. As per prosecution, the appellant was
apprehended after an encounter whereby his associate lost his life. None from
police party sustained fire shot injury, which appears to be surprising. As per
complainant Malik Muhammad Naeem the mashirnama was written by P.W ASI Muhammad
Moosa which as per him was written by police constable at his dictation; such
inconsistency could not be lost sight of as it has made the very preparation of
mashirnama of arrest and recovery to be doubtful. The evidence of I.O/SIP Zakir
Hussain is only to the extent that he after investigation submitted charge
sheet of the case. If for the sake of arguments, his evidence is believed to be
true even then it is not enough to improve the case of prosecution. In these
circumstances, it is concluded safely that the prosecution has not been able to
prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt.
5. In case
of Muhammad Mansha vs The State (2018 SCMR 772), it has been held
by the Hon’ble Apex Court that;
“4….Needless to mention that while
giving the benefit of doubt to an accused it is not necessary that there should
be many circumstances creating doubt. If there is a circumstance which creates
reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of the accused, then the
accused would be entitled to the benefit of such doubt, not as a matter of
grace and concession, but as a matter of right. It is based on the maxim,
"it is better that ten guilty persons be acquitted rather than one
innocent person be convicted".
6. In view
of the facts and reasons discussed above, the conviction and sentence awarded
to the appellant by way of impugned judgment are set-aside, consequently, he is
acquitted of the offence for which he was charged, tried, convicted and
sentenced by learned trial Court. No formal order of his release is being
passed for the reason that he has already released in the above case after
completion of his jail term.
7.
The instant jail appeal is disposed
of accordingly.
JUDGE