ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No.S-58 of 2019.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

For hearing of main case.

17.01.2022

                        Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate for the appellants.

                        Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The facts in brief necessary for disposal of the instant criminal appeal are that the appellants allegedly with absconding accused Misri, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of Mst.Perozan, by causing her dagger blows, after declaring her to be “Kari”, for that they were booked and reported upon. After due trial, they for offence punishable under section 302(b) PPC were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay compensation of rupees Three Lacs each, to the legal heirs of the said deceased and in default whereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year with benefit of Section 382-B Cr.PC, by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Kandhkot, vide judgment dated 06.08.2019, which has been impugned by the appellants before this Court by preferring the instant criminal appeal.

2.                     It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police and learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced them on the basis of no evidence; therefore, they are entitled to their acquittal.

3.                     The father of the deceased put his appearance, sought for time to engage a counsel but never turned up to engage a counsel to advance arguments on his behalf. However, learned Addl.P.G for the State by supporting the impugned judgment has sought for dismissal of the instant criminal appeal.

4.                     I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

5.                     No relative of the deceased came forward to lodge FIR of the incident, though they as per PW/PC Amanullah/Corpse bearer acknowledged the receipt of dead body of the deceased timely, which appears to be surprising. The FIR of the incident has been lodged by ASI Ghulam Shabir on behalf of the State. It was stated by the complainant and PW/PC Abdul Latif that that they came to know through spy information that the appellants and others are going to kill a lady in their house by declaring her to be “Kari”. On such information, they went at the place of incident and found the appellants and others coming out of their house with daggers and then they made their escape good by taking advantage of narrow streets. The women present in the house disclosed the name of the deceased to be Mst.Perozan. No such woman is examined by the prosecution. The complainant and PW/PC Attaullah were fair enough to admit that they have not seen the appellants committing the murder of the deceased. In that situation, they could not be said to be eye witnesses of actual death of the deceased to be relied upon to base conviction. There is no recovery of any sort from any of the appellants even after their arrest. In these circumstances, the involvement of the appellants in the above said incident is appearing to be doubtful.

6.                     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".

7.                     In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants by way of impugned judgment are set aside, consequently, they are acquitted of the offence, for which they have been charged, tried and convicted by the learned trial court; they shall be released forthwith in present case, if are not required to be detained in any custody case.

8.                     The instant Criminal Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

               JUDGE 

.