IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 121 of 2020

Appellant: Faraz Ahmed through Mr. Abdullah Nizamani advocate

The State: Mr. Khadim Hussain, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of hearing: 15.12.2022

Date of judgment: 15.12.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is alleged that on arrest from the appellant was secured a pistol of 30 bore with magazine containing 12 live bullets of same bore by police party of P.S Airport, led by I.O/SIP Badar Shakeel, which he allegedly used while committing murder of Wajahat Ali Khan, for that he was booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, he was convicted for the said offence without specifying the penal section and was sentenced to undergo R.I for 07 years with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned I-Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Malir, Karachi, vide judgment dated 07.12.2019, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant jail appeal.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police at the instance of the complainant party of main murder case, therefore, he is entitled to his acquittal by extending him benefit of doubt, who even otherwise, has already undergone the sentence awarded to him.

3. Learned Addl. P.G for the state by supporting the impugned judgment has sought for dismissal of instant jail appeal by contending that pistol has been used by the appellant while committing murder of Wajahat Ali Khan and it has been found matched with the empties secured from the place of incident and prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt.

4. Heard arguments and perused the record.

5. The appellant is licensed holder of the pistol, subject matter of the case and as per him he has been involved in this case falsely by the police only for the reason that he has misused the same for committing murder of Wajahat Ali Khan. In such murder case, he has been acquitted by this Court in earlier course of the day. In these circumstances, it would be safe to conclude that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against him beyond shadow of doubt.

9. In the 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".

10. 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 with which he was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court; he shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other custody case.

11. The instant jail appeal is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE