ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Acq. Appeal No.S-113 of 2021

Date	Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on office objection at flag `A`

2. For orders on MA No.6148/2021

3. For hearing of main case

07-03-2022

Mr. Haji Shamsuddin Rajpar, Advocate for the appellant 12-09-2014

.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

1. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment. Perusal of impugned judgment reflects that the trial court has acquitted the respondents/accused for the following reasons:-

“Point No.1.

10. As regards to this point No.1, the prosecution has examined complainant and other witnesses before this court but the prosecution has remained failed to produce reliable evidence to connect accused persons with commission of alleged offence.

Complainant deposed that they went for treatment on day of incident but MC showed that victims came for treatment on the next day of incident.

Complainant deposed that they were taken to hospital by ASI/I.O of the case on the day of incident but I.O denied. Complainant said that there is no house at the place of incident except their own but I.O said that there are other houses. Injured Iqbal is silent whether police has examined his injuries or not. The period of injuries is doubtful as per time of incident and medical certificate. Complainant has registered false FIR in order to usurp the amount of loan taken by complainant from accused Munsif.

11. These variations of aforementioned points suggest interference that no occurrence has taken place. In absence of any other independent evidence and in the light of above discussion it cannot be said that prosecution has successfully established its case against accused persons and it is duty of the prosecution to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt, accused is not bound to prove his innocence. In the light of above circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove the case against accused persons, therefore, under these circumstances the point No.1 is answered as not proved.

Point No.2.

12. In view of above findings on point No.1, discussion and circumstances, I acquit the accused persons Munsif s/o Hassan Zardari, Mubeen s/o Hassan Zardari, Ali Akbar s/o Nek Muhammad Zardari and Darwaish s/o Nek Muhammad Zardari from the charge u/s 245(i) Cr.P.C. Accused persons are present on bail, their bail bonds stand cancelled and sureties stand discharged.”

2. I have also gone through the impugned judgment which in my view is well-reasoned and passed in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment. Resultantly, the same is maintained and instant Criminal Acquittal Appeal is dismissed.

JUDGE

Suleman Khan/PA